24.04.2014 Views

PHEA - Unlocking the Potential of ICT in Higher Education WEB

PHEA - Unlocking the Potential of ICT in Higher Education WEB

PHEA - Unlocking the Potential of ICT in Higher Education WEB

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong><br />

<strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al<br />

Technology Initiatives at African Universities


Published by <strong>the</strong> South African Institute for Distance <strong>Education</strong> (Saide)<br />

14th Floor<br />

Rennie House<br />

19 Amesh<strong>of</strong> Street<br />

Braamfonte<strong>in</strong><br />

Johannesburg<br />

Tel: + 27 11 403 2813<br />

www.saide.org.za<br />

<strong>in</strong>fo@saide.org.za<br />

©2013 Saide<br />

ISBN: 978-0-9869837-8-8<br />

Case Study Series Editor: Ephraim Mhlanga<br />

Copy editor: Jacquie Wi<strong>the</strong>rs<br />

Design and layout: Natalie van der Walt<br />

Cover photo: Shutterstock (http://www.shutterstock.com/licens<strong>in</strong>g.mhtml)<br />

The Partnership for <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong> <strong>in</strong> Africa (<strong>PHEA</strong>) was a jo<strong>in</strong>t project <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Carnegie Corporation<br />

<strong>of</strong> New York, <strong>the</strong> Ford Foundation, <strong>the</strong> John D. and Ca<strong>the</strong>r<strong>in</strong>e T. MacArthur Foundation, <strong>the</strong> Rockefeller<br />

Foundation, <strong>the</strong> William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, <strong>the</strong> Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, and <strong>the</strong> Kresge<br />

Foundation.<br />

The follow<strong>in</strong>g higher education <strong>in</strong>stitutions participated <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>PHEA</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiative (ETI):<br />

Catholic University <strong>of</strong> Mozambique<br />

Kenyatta University, Kenya<br />

Makerere University, Uganda<br />

University <strong>of</strong> Dar es Salaam, Tanzania<br />

University <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong> W<strong>in</strong>neba, Ghana<br />

University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan, Nigeria<br />

University <strong>of</strong> Jos, Nigeria<br />

In several cases, versions <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> case studies have been published <strong>in</strong> conference proceed<strong>in</strong>gs and/or <strong>in</strong>ternational peer-reviewed journals:<br />

Joel S. Mtebe and Hashim M. Twaakyondo: ‘Develop<strong>in</strong>g and Us<strong>in</strong>g Animations and Simulations to Teach Computer Science Courses’ – Proceed<strong>in</strong>gs<br />

<strong>of</strong> International Conference on e-Learn<strong>in</strong>g and e-Technologies <strong>in</strong> <strong>Education</strong> (ICEEE), 2012: 240–246; Joel S. Mtebe and Hashim M. Twaakyondo:<br />

‘Are Animations Effective Tools for Teach<strong>in</strong>g Computer Science Courses <strong>in</strong> Develop<strong>in</strong>g Countries? The case <strong>of</strong> University <strong>of</strong> Dar es Salaam’<br />

– International Journal <strong>of</strong> Digital Information and Wireless Communications (IJDIWC) 2(2), April, 2012: 202–207; Hashim Twaakyondo and<br />

Mulembwa Munaku: ‘Experience <strong>of</strong> Course Migration from Blackboard to Moodle LMS’ – International Journal <strong>of</strong> Comput<strong>in</strong>g and <strong>ICT</strong> Research,<br />

6(2), December, 2012: 33–45; Gloria Adedoja, Omobola Adelore, Francis Egbokhare and Ayodeji Oluleye: ‘Learners’ Acceptance <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Use <strong>of</strong><br />

Mobile Phones to Deliver Tutorials <strong>in</strong> a Distance Learn<strong>in</strong>g Context: A case study at <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan’ – African Journal <strong>of</strong> Information<br />

Systems (AJIS), 5(3), 2013: 79–93; Ayotola Aremu, Olaosebikan Fakolujo and Ayodeji Oluleye: ‘Design<strong>in</strong>g and Develop<strong>in</strong>g e-Content <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong><br />

<strong>Education</strong>’ – under review at Research <strong>in</strong> Learn<strong>in</strong>g Technology: The Journal for <strong>the</strong> Association <strong>of</strong> Learn<strong>in</strong>g Technology (ALT-J); John Kandiri and Joel<br />

S. Mtebe: ‘Determ<strong>in</strong>ants <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Success <strong>of</strong> Diffusion <strong>of</strong> Technology Innovations <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong> Institutions <strong>in</strong> Africa: A Social Network<br />

Approach’ – under review at African Journal <strong>of</strong> Information Systems (AJIS); Brenda Mall<strong>in</strong>son and Greig Krull: ‘An Investigation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Deployment<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Moodle Virtual Learn<strong>in</strong>g Environment at Eight African Universities‘ – under review at International Journal <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong> and Development<br />

Us<strong>in</strong>g Information and Communication Technology (IJED<strong>ICT</strong>); and Andrew Mwanika, Ian Munabi and Tito Okumu: ‘The Design and Feasibility<br />

<strong>of</strong> Adoption <strong>of</strong> a Special Purpose e-Portfolio <strong>in</strong> an African University’ – under review at International Journal <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong> and Development Us<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Information and Communication Technology (IJED<strong>ICT</strong>).


Contents<br />

Abbreviations and Acronyms 1<br />

Introduction 2<br />

Embedd<strong>in</strong>g Quality Improvement <strong>in</strong> Onl<strong>in</strong>e Courses: A case study <strong>of</strong> seven African<br />

universities<br />

Ephraim Mhlanga, Greig Krull and Brenda Mall<strong>in</strong>son<br />

Determ<strong>in</strong>ants <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Successful Diffusion <strong>of</strong> Technology Innovations <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong><br />

<strong>Education</strong> Institutions <strong>in</strong> Africa: A social network approach<br />

John Kandiri and Joel S. Mtebe<br />

An Investigation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Deployment <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Moodle Virtual Learn<strong>in</strong>g Environment at<br />

Eight African Universities<br />

Brenda Mall<strong>in</strong>son and Greig Krull<br />

The Experience <strong>of</strong> Course Migration from <strong>the</strong> Blackboard to <strong>the</strong> Moodle LMS: A case<br />

study from <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> Dar es Salaam<br />

Hashim M. Twaakyondo and Mulembwa Munaku<br />

Us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> Moodle Learn<strong>in</strong>g Management System for Teach<strong>in</strong>g and Learn<strong>in</strong>g at <strong>the</strong><br />

University <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong>, W<strong>in</strong>neba<br />

Issifu Yidana, Frederick Kwaku Sarfo, Alexander Kyei Edwards, Raymond Boison and Osafo Apeanti Wilson<br />

Design<strong>in</strong>g and Develop<strong>in</strong>g e-Content <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: The University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan<br />

model<br />

Ayotola Aremu, Olaosebikan Fakolujo and Ayodeji Oluleye<br />

Students’ Acceptance <strong>of</strong> Mobile Phones for Distance Learn<strong>in</strong>g Tutorials: A case study<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan<br />

Gloria Adedoja, Omobola Adelore, Francis Egbokhare and Ayodeji Oluleye<br />

The Design and Feasibility <strong>of</strong> Adoption <strong>of</strong> a Special Purpose e-Portfolio <strong>in</strong> an African<br />

University: The case <strong>of</strong> Makerere University<br />

Andrew Mwanika, Ian Munabi and Tito Okumu<br />

Develop<strong>in</strong>g and Us<strong>in</strong>g Animations and Simulations to Teach Computer Science<br />

Courses: The case <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> Dar es Salaam<br />

Joel S. Mtebe and Hashim M. Twaakyondo<br />

4<br />

18<br />

30<br />

46<br />

58<br />

76<br />

90<br />

104<br />

112


Abbreviations and Acronyms<br />

3G<br />

CD<br />

CPU<br />

C-TAM<br />

CVL<br />

DLC<br />

DVD<br />

ETI<br />

FGD<br />

FTP<br />

<strong>ICT</strong><br />

IT<br />

Gb<br />

GHz<br />

GPRS<br />

GSM<br />

HoD<br />

LAN<br />

LMS<br />

Mb<br />

MEd<br />

m-Learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />

MUELE<br />

NUC<br />

OER<br />

OS<br />

PDA<br />

PDF<br />

<strong>PHEA</strong><br />

QI<br />

ROM<br />

RPM<br />

Saide<br />

SATA<br />

SMS<br />

SPSS<br />

TAM<br />

TPB<br />

UDSM<br />

UEW<br />

UI<br />

VC<br />

VLE<br />

Third Generation (Mobile Phone Technology)<br />

Compact Disc<br />

Central Process<strong>in</strong>g Unit<br />

Comb<strong>in</strong>ed Technology Acceptance Model<br />

Centre for Virtual Learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Distance Learn<strong>in</strong>g Centre<br />

Digital Video Disc<br />

<strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiative<br />

Focus Group Discussion<br />

File Transfer Protocol<br />

Information and Communication Technology<br />

Information Technology<br />

Gigabyte<br />

Gigahertz<br />

General Packet Radio Service<br />

Global System for Mobile Communications<br />

Head <strong>of</strong> Department<br />

Local Area Network<br />

Learn<strong>in</strong>g Management System<br />

Megabyte<br />

Masters <strong>in</strong> <strong>Education</strong><br />

Mobile Learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Makerere University Electronic Learn<strong>in</strong>g Environment<br />

National Universities Commission<br />

Open <strong>Education</strong>al Resource(s)<br />

Open Source<br />

Personal Digital Assistant<br />

Portable Document Format<br />

Partnership for <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong> <strong>in</strong> Africa<br />

Quality Improvement<br />

Read-only Memory<br />

Revolutions Per M<strong>in</strong>ute<br />

South African Institute for Distance <strong>Education</strong><br />

Serial Advanced Technology Attachment<br />

Short Message Service<br />

Statistical Package for <strong>the</strong> Social Sciences<br />

Technology Acceptance Model<br />

Theory <strong>of</strong> Planned Behaviour<br />

University <strong>of</strong> Dar es Salaam<br />

University <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong>, W<strong>in</strong>neba<br />

University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan<br />

Vice-chancellor<br />

Virtual Learn<strong>in</strong>g Environment<br />

1


Introduction<br />

Introduction<br />

The Partnership for <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong> <strong>in</strong> Africa (<strong>PHEA</strong>) was a ten-year funder collaboration 1 that supported <strong>the</strong><br />

streng<strong>the</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> higher education <strong>in</strong> Africa. The <strong>PHEA</strong> f<strong>in</strong>ancially supported research and strategic <strong>in</strong>terventions<br />

that encouraged systemic and susta<strong>in</strong>able change <strong>in</strong> selected African countries. It identified <strong>in</strong>terventions to<br />

streng<strong>the</strong>n <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> educational technology <strong>in</strong> African universities. In October, 2006, <strong>the</strong> <strong>PHEA</strong> convened an<br />

<strong>Education</strong>al Technology Th<strong>in</strong>k Tank for Africa, which was hosted by <strong>the</strong> Centre for <strong>Education</strong>al Technology (CET)<br />

(now known as <strong>the</strong> Centre for Innovation <strong>in</strong> Learn<strong>in</strong>g and Teach<strong>in</strong>g) at <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> Cape Town.<br />

One <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> developments flow<strong>in</strong>g from <strong>the</strong> work <strong>of</strong> this Th<strong>in</strong>k Tank was <strong>the</strong> launch, <strong>in</strong> August, 2008, <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>PHEA</strong><br />

<strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiative (ETI). This ambitious five-year programme 2 focused on improv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong><br />

educational technology with<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> ambit <strong>of</strong> context-specific educational challenges <strong>in</strong> African universities. This<br />

meant that participat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>stitutions not only had to design <strong>in</strong>terventions that served <strong>the</strong> purpose <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>troduc<strong>in</strong>g<br />

technology to improve teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g, but had to do this <strong>in</strong> a way that accounted for <strong>the</strong> specific challenges<br />

related to <strong>the</strong> context <strong>in</strong> develop<strong>in</strong>g countries and with<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> participat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>stitutions <strong>the</strong>mselves. This programme<br />

served two primary goals. Firstly, it was established to support educational technology <strong>in</strong>terventions <strong>in</strong> African<br />

universities. Secondly, it created an opportunity for evidence-based knowledge shar<strong>in</strong>g and <strong>in</strong>novation.<br />

The participat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>stitutions were <strong>the</strong> Catholic University <strong>of</strong> Mozambique (UCM – Universidade Católica de<br />

Moçambique); Kenyatta University (KU), Kenya; Makerere University (MAK), Uganda; University <strong>of</strong> Dar es Salaam<br />

(UDSM), Tanzania; University <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong>, W<strong>in</strong>neba (UEW), Ghana; University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan (UI), Nigeria; and<br />

University <strong>of</strong> Jos (UJ), Nigeria. The <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI was conducted under <strong>the</strong> auspices <strong>of</strong> Saide, <strong>the</strong> South African<br />

Institute for Distance <strong>Education</strong>, <strong>in</strong> collaboration with CET.<br />

In many respects, <strong>the</strong> design <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> programme has made <strong>the</strong> <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI a unique <strong>in</strong>itiative that has allowed<br />

for susta<strong>in</strong>ed <strong>in</strong>teraction and dialogue with and between seven African universities over an extended period.<br />

The programme has generated several opportunities to research and identify effective strategies for deploy<strong>in</strong>g<br />

<strong>in</strong>formation and communication technology (<strong>ICT</strong>) to support teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> resource-scarce university<br />

environments. This collection <strong>of</strong> case studies seeks to present some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> key lessons generated from <strong>the</strong>se<br />

opportunities. They do not seek just to showcase best practice (although <strong>the</strong>y <strong>of</strong>ten do so); <strong>the</strong>y also serve to<br />

highlight <strong>the</strong> many challenges that face universities aim<strong>in</strong>g to <strong>in</strong>tegrate <strong>ICT</strong> effectively <strong>in</strong>to <strong>the</strong>ir operations, and<br />

<strong>the</strong>y serve to demonstrate how <strong>the</strong>se universities are tackl<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>se challenges.<br />

The case studies represent <strong>the</strong> culm<strong>in</strong>ation <strong>of</strong> many years <strong>of</strong> hard work by a wide network <strong>of</strong> people.<br />

Acknowledgement must go first and foremost to <strong>the</strong> dedicated project teams assembled at each <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> participat<strong>in</strong>g<br />

universities. Their commitment to <strong>the</strong> task at hand and will<strong>in</strong>gness to put long hours <strong>in</strong>to mak<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>ir projects<br />

a success took <strong>the</strong> <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI well beyond <strong>the</strong> expected project deliverables, generat<strong>in</strong>g results and new capacities<br />

that will be susta<strong>in</strong>ed long beyond <strong>the</strong> lifetime <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> programme.<br />

1 The orig<strong>in</strong>al members <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>PHEA</strong> were <strong>the</strong> Carnegie Corporation <strong>of</strong> New York and <strong>the</strong> Rockefeller, Ford and John D. and Ca<strong>the</strong>r<strong>in</strong>e T.<br />

MacArthur Foundations. The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, <strong>the</strong> Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and <strong>the</strong> Kresge Foundation later<br />

jo<strong>in</strong>ed <strong>the</strong> partnership.<br />

2 The ETI is <strong>of</strong>ten referred to as a project but we refer to it as a programme to dist<strong>in</strong>guish it from <strong>the</strong> 26 projects that it encompassed.<br />

2<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


Introduction<br />

This commitment and effort was also matched by <strong>the</strong> strong team <strong>of</strong> specialists from Saide and its network <strong>of</strong><br />

sub-contractors. The team was remarkably consistent and stable throughout <strong>the</strong> programme, despite its duration,<br />

and feedback from <strong>in</strong>stitutions attests to <strong>the</strong> excellent work that this team has done <strong>in</strong> support<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>stitutions to<br />

achieve <strong>the</strong>ir goals.<br />

F<strong>in</strong>ally, <strong>the</strong> programme would not have been possible without <strong>the</strong> support <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> five key funders: <strong>the</strong> Carnegie<br />

Corporation <strong>of</strong> New York, <strong>the</strong> Rockefeller Foundation, <strong>the</strong> Ford Foundation, <strong>the</strong> John D. and Ca<strong>the</strong>r<strong>in</strong>e T.<br />

MacArthur Foundation, and <strong>the</strong> Kresge Foundation. This support was not only f<strong>in</strong>ancial; it came also <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> form<br />

<strong>of</strong> excellent advice and human support dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> formative stages <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> programme, as well as <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> will<strong>in</strong>gness<br />

to allow <strong>the</strong> programme time to evolve so that universities could def<strong>in</strong>e for <strong>the</strong>mselves <strong>the</strong> most suitable pathways<br />

forward for e-learn<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir <strong>in</strong>stitutions. This is a rare luxury <strong>in</strong> funded programmes, and we hope <strong>the</strong> results<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> programme – some captured <strong>in</strong> this collection <strong>of</strong> case studies – speak for <strong>the</strong>mselves.<br />

NEIL BUTCHER<br />

<strong>PHEA</strong> ETI Project Leader<br />

EPHRAIM MHLANGA<br />

Case Study Project Manager<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

3


Embedd<strong>in</strong>g Quality Improvement <strong>in</strong> Onl<strong>in</strong>e Courses:<br />

A case study <strong>of</strong> seven African universities<br />

Embedd<strong>in</strong>g Quality Improvement <strong>in</strong><br />

Onl<strong>in</strong>e Courses: A case study <strong>of</strong> seven<br />

African universities<br />

Ephraim Mhlanga<br />

Saide<br />

ephraimm@saide.org.za<br />

Greig Krull<br />

Saide<br />

greigk@saide.org.za<br />

Brenda Mall<strong>in</strong>son<br />

Saide; Rhodes University, South Africa<br />

brendam@saide.org.za; B.Mall<strong>in</strong>son@ru.ac.za<br />

ABSTRACT<br />

The project activities with<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> Partnership for <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong> <strong>in</strong> Africa (<strong>PHEA</strong>) <strong>Education</strong>al Technology<br />

Initiative (ETI) <strong>in</strong>volved many facets <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> deployment <strong>of</strong> educational technology to support teach<strong>in</strong>g and<br />

learn<strong>in</strong>g at seven sub-Saharan African universities. One <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> major components <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> project was <strong>the</strong> design and<br />

development <strong>of</strong> onl<strong>in</strong>e courses. This case study presents <strong>the</strong> capacity-build<strong>in</strong>g processes implemented to embed<br />

quality and post-review improvement <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>se courses to ensure high quality outputs. The different phases <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

review process are described, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> creation <strong>of</strong> a course review <strong>in</strong>strument and <strong>the</strong> feedback from a set <strong>of</strong><br />

external reviewers. The successes and challenges <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> quality improvement processes are exam<strong>in</strong>ed, with <strong>the</strong> case<br />

study culm<strong>in</strong>at<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> a set <strong>of</strong> lessons learned.<br />

Keywords: quality assurance, quality improvement, onl<strong>in</strong>e course design, Partnership for <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong><br />

<strong>in</strong> Africa (<strong>PHEA</strong>) <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiative (ETI)<br />

INTRODUCTION<br />

Quality assurance is a vital part <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> course design and development process. It aims to promote effective teach<strong>in</strong>g<br />

and learn<strong>in</strong>g and <strong>the</strong> development <strong>of</strong> relevant knowledge and skills on <strong>the</strong> part <strong>of</strong> students. High quality onl<strong>in</strong>e<br />

courses need to be <strong>in</strong>tentionally designed for an onl<strong>in</strong>e learn<strong>in</strong>g environment <strong>in</strong> order to maximise <strong>the</strong> affordances<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> changed environment. Jung and Latchem (2012) emphasise that basic competencies for <strong>the</strong> provision <strong>of</strong><br />

e-learn<strong>in</strong>g are crucial, but note that <strong>the</strong> skills required for susta<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g quality <strong>in</strong> this area are constantly evolv<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

Sound <strong>in</strong>structional design comb<strong>in</strong>ed with high quality content <strong>in</strong>cludes <strong>the</strong> selection <strong>of</strong> a learn<strong>in</strong>g approach, <strong>the</strong><br />

selection/development <strong>of</strong> appropriate learn<strong>in</strong>g content, <strong>the</strong> sequenc<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> learn<strong>in</strong>g, and <strong>the</strong> alignment <strong>of</strong> activities<br />

and assessments (Uvalić-Trumbić & Daniel, 2013).<br />

However, Grifoll et al. (2010) report a paucity <strong>of</strong> research <strong>in</strong> benchmark<strong>in</strong>g and quality <strong>in</strong> e-learn<strong>in</strong>g. Although<br />

universities typically have def<strong>in</strong>ed policies and procedures to ensure <strong>the</strong> quality <strong>of</strong> courses, when academics<br />

beg<strong>in</strong> to convert exist<strong>in</strong>g courses for onl<strong>in</strong>e delivery quality assurance is <strong>of</strong>ten an afterthought and is sometimes<br />

attempted by <strong>in</strong>tegrat<strong>in</strong>g onl<strong>in</strong>e learn<strong>in</strong>g good practice guidel<strong>in</strong>es with regular quality assurance; <strong>in</strong> some cases,<br />

onl<strong>in</strong>e courses slip through cracks <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional system and do not undergo any quality assurance processes<br />

at all. Initial research by Lund University (Grifoll et al., 2010) has shown that benchmark<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>itiatives can and<br />

4<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


Embedd<strong>in</strong>g Quality Improvement <strong>in</strong> Onl<strong>in</strong>e Courses:<br />

A case study <strong>of</strong> seven African universities<br />

should have a positive impact on regular on-campus course delivery, with many <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se onl<strong>in</strong>e courses now be<strong>in</strong>g<br />

<strong>of</strong>fered <strong>in</strong> blended learn<strong>in</strong>g mode.<br />

The current case study exam<strong>in</strong>es <strong>the</strong> concentrated quality improvement (QI) process that was <strong>in</strong>itiated with<strong>in</strong><br />

a large educational technology project to support onl<strong>in</strong>e course design and development at seven sub-Saharan<br />

African universities. The case study sketches <strong>the</strong> background to <strong>the</strong> project, expla<strong>in</strong>s <strong>the</strong> aim <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> QI process<br />

and discusses <strong>the</strong> different phases that made up <strong>the</strong> process. The case study reflects on <strong>the</strong> successes and challenges<br />

encountered, and concludes with a set <strong>of</strong> lessons learned.<br />

BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY<br />

The <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI aimed to support <strong>in</strong>terventions <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> participant universities 1 to make <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>gly effective use<br />

<strong>of</strong> educational technology to address some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> underly<strong>in</strong>g educational challenges fac<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> higher education<br />

sector <strong>in</strong> Africa. An important component <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> project was ensur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> quality <strong>of</strong> courses developed at each<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutions. For most <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> participat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>stitutions, exist<strong>in</strong>g quality criteria did not specifically <strong>in</strong>clude<br />

provision for onl<strong>in</strong>e or blended course delivery. The project support team <strong>the</strong>refore proposed and implemented,<br />

as part <strong>of</strong> this <strong>in</strong>itiative, two <strong>in</strong>ter-related strategies for <strong>the</strong> improvement <strong>of</strong> quality. The first strategy was <strong>the</strong><br />

implementation <strong>of</strong> a set <strong>of</strong> structured quality improvement activities that would result <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> development <strong>of</strong><br />

high quality courses. It is this strategy that is reported <strong>in</strong> this case study. The second strategy was <strong>the</strong> ref<strong>in</strong>ement<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional quality systems to improve and monitor technology-enhanced teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g processes.<br />

THE QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROCESS<br />

One <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>tended outcomes <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> project was to make some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> designed and developed courses available as<br />

openly licensed resources. Thus, for both <strong>in</strong>ternal <strong>in</strong>stitutional and external purposes, <strong>the</strong> high quality <strong>of</strong> courses<br />

was imperative. This led to <strong>the</strong> design and development <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> quality improvement (QI) processes, one <strong>of</strong> which<br />

was <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>ternal and external formative review <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> onl<strong>in</strong>e courses. The purpose <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> quality review process<br />

was to support course developers to improve <strong>the</strong> quality <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir onl<strong>in</strong>e courses. It was thought that subject<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong><br />

courses to scrut<strong>in</strong>y by external reviewers would benchmark <strong>the</strong> quality <strong>of</strong> courses <strong>in</strong> comparison to regional and<br />

<strong>in</strong>ternational standards. Additionally, <strong>in</strong>dependent external review would provide <strong>the</strong> courses with credibility from<br />

this perspective. A secondary objective <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> review process was to identify common shortcom<strong>in</strong>gs <strong>in</strong> courses and<br />

<strong>in</strong>dicate where future support would be required.<br />

The QI process affected a number <strong>of</strong> stakeholder groups:<br />

• Course developers;<br />

• The <strong>in</strong>stitutional project support teams (<strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g project leaders and any centralised support units);<br />

• The external project support team; and<br />

• External reviewers.<br />

The phases mak<strong>in</strong>g up <strong>the</strong> QI process are reflected <strong>in</strong> Figure 1. The sections that follow describe each <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> phases<br />

<strong>in</strong> detail.<br />

1 The participat<strong>in</strong>g higher education <strong>in</strong>stitutions were Kenyatta University (Kenya), University <strong>of</strong> Dar es Salaam (Tanzania), University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan<br />

(Nigeria), University <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong> W<strong>in</strong>neba (Ghana), University <strong>of</strong> Jos (Nigeria), Catholic University <strong>of</strong> Mozambique (Universidade Católica de<br />

Moçambique), and Makerere University (Uganda).<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

5


Embedd<strong>in</strong>g Quality Improvement <strong>in</strong> Onl<strong>in</strong>e Courses:<br />

A case study <strong>of</strong> seven African universities<br />

Figure 1: The QI process<br />

Phase 1<br />

Course Design<br />

for Quality<br />

Phase 6<br />

Evaluation <strong>of</strong> QI<br />

Process<br />

Phase 2<br />

Internal Review<br />

Phase 5<br />

Course<br />

Revision<br />

Phase 3<br />

External Review<br />

Preparation<br />

Phase 4<br />

External<br />

Review<br />

Phase 1: Course design for quality<br />

The design and development <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> onl<strong>in</strong>e courses began with a series <strong>of</strong> capacity development <strong>in</strong>itiatives and<br />

follow-up support, by <strong>the</strong> external project support team, at each <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> participat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>stitutions. As most <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

course developers <strong>in</strong>volved had not previously designed courses for onl<strong>in</strong>e or blended delivery, <strong>the</strong> aims <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

capacity-build<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>itiatives were to prepare and support <strong>the</strong> course developers <strong>in</strong> design<strong>in</strong>g and mount<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>ir<br />

courses onl<strong>in</strong>e on <strong>the</strong>ir <strong>in</strong>stitutional Moodle servers. Dur<strong>in</strong>g and between <strong>the</strong>se capacity-build<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>terventions<br />

and extensive follow-up support, course developers cont<strong>in</strong>ued to work on <strong>the</strong>ir courses.<br />

The capacity-build<strong>in</strong>g workshops <strong>in</strong>cluded specific focus on <strong>the</strong> follow<strong>in</strong>g:<br />

• Design<strong>in</strong>g and develop<strong>in</strong>g effective onl<strong>in</strong>e courses;<br />

• Design<strong>in</strong>g and develop<strong>in</strong>g multimedia learn<strong>in</strong>g objects (where required);<br />

• Moodle virtual learn<strong>in</strong>g environment (VLE) functionality;<br />

• QI (where <strong>the</strong> QI process was <strong>in</strong>troduced); and<br />

• Deploy<strong>in</strong>g open educational resources (OER).<br />

Phase 2: Internal review<br />

As part <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> QI process, a number <strong>of</strong> reviews were undertaken at an early stage <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> course development. Course<br />

developers first undertook a self-evaluation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir courses, and <strong>the</strong>n undertook peer reviews <strong>of</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r courses at<br />

<strong>the</strong>ir <strong>in</strong>stitutions be<strong>in</strong>g developed under <strong>the</strong> <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI. The feedback from peer reviews was shared to <strong>in</strong>form<br />

6<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


Embedd<strong>in</strong>g Quality Improvement <strong>in</strong> Onl<strong>in</strong>e Courses:<br />

A case study <strong>of</strong> seven African universities<br />

all developers <strong>of</strong> issues that <strong>the</strong>ir colleagues were encounter<strong>in</strong>g, many <strong>of</strong> which were common. In this way, good<br />

practices and problems could be discussed and solutions <strong>of</strong>fered. Informal review <strong>in</strong>put was also provided by <strong>the</strong><br />

external project support team, which identified common challenges. A review <strong>of</strong> multimedia content developed<br />

for use <strong>in</strong> some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> courses was also undertaken. After each review iteration, course developers cont<strong>in</strong>ued with<br />

<strong>the</strong> development <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir courses and implemented <strong>the</strong> recommended quality improvements. As part <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> review<br />

process, one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> members <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> project support team collaborated with one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutions to develop an<br />

<strong>in</strong>itial spreadsheet review <strong>in</strong>strument, which was shared with all and used to support and guide <strong>the</strong> review processes.<br />

Phase 3: External review preparation<br />

The diagram <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> Appendix illustrates <strong>the</strong> process that evolved and was adhered to for <strong>the</strong> external review with<br />

reference to <strong>the</strong> relevant stakeholders, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g Phases 3 (external review preparation), 4 (external review), 5<br />

(course revision), and 6 (evaluation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> QI process).<br />

Development <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> review <strong>in</strong>strument<br />

In def<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g a review <strong>in</strong>strument to use, <strong>the</strong> project support team set about identify<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>ternationally recognised<br />

quality practices and standards. Several benchmarks or quality standards have been def<strong>in</strong>ed and tested <strong>in</strong>ternationally<br />

(Uvalić-Trumbić & Daniel, 2013). The team exam<strong>in</strong>ed <strong>the</strong> available <strong>in</strong>struments, what form <strong>the</strong>y took, <strong>the</strong>ir scope,<br />

and <strong>the</strong> criteria identified. The follow<strong>in</strong>g standards and <strong>in</strong>struments were exam<strong>in</strong>ed:<br />

• Quality Matters (QM) Rubric Standards (Quality Matters Program, 2011): The Quality Matters Rubric is a set<br />

<strong>of</strong> eight general standards and 41 specific standards used to evaluate <strong>the</strong> design <strong>of</strong> onl<strong>in</strong>e and blended courses.<br />

The rubric is complete with annotations that expla<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> application <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> standards and <strong>the</strong> relationship<br />

between <strong>the</strong>m. A scor<strong>in</strong>g system and set <strong>of</strong> onl<strong>in</strong>e tools facilitate <strong>the</strong> evaluation by a team <strong>of</strong> reviewers;<br />

• Essential Quality Standards (EQS) (eCampusAlberta, 2012): The eCampusAlberta Quality Suite comprises<br />

four components to be used toge<strong>the</strong>r to assist faculty and <strong>in</strong>structional designers with onl<strong>in</strong>e curriculum<br />

development. The four components are <strong>the</strong> Quality Standards White Paper, <strong>the</strong> eLearn<strong>in</strong>g Rubric (available<br />

<strong>in</strong> pr<strong>in</strong>t and onl<strong>in</strong>e), <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional Curricula Self-assessment Scorecard, and <strong>the</strong> Essential Quality Standards<br />

(EQS);<br />

• Onl<strong>in</strong>e Course Evaluation Project (OCEP) (Monterey Institute for Technology and <strong>Education</strong>, 2010): This<br />

project identifies and evaluates exist<strong>in</strong>g onl<strong>in</strong>e courses <strong>in</strong> higher education, among o<strong>the</strong>r sectors. The goal <strong>of</strong><br />

OCEP is to provide <strong>the</strong> academic community with a criteria-based evaluation tool to assess and compare <strong>the</strong><br />

quality <strong>of</strong> onl<strong>in</strong>e courses. The focus <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> evaluation is on <strong>the</strong> presentation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> content and <strong>the</strong> pedagogical<br />

aspects <strong>of</strong> onl<strong>in</strong>e courses, but <strong>the</strong> evaluation also considers <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>structional and communication methods so<br />

vital <strong>in</strong> a successful onl<strong>in</strong>e learn<strong>in</strong>g experience; and<br />

• OPEN e-Learn<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> Capacity Build<strong>in</strong>g (ECB) Check (European Foundation for Quality <strong>in</strong> e-Learn<strong>in</strong>g, 2011):<br />

The ECBCheck <strong>in</strong>itiative is a pr<strong>of</strong>essional community <strong>of</strong> organisations that are <strong>in</strong>terested <strong>in</strong> quality issues<br />

<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> field <strong>of</strong> e-learn<strong>in</strong>g for capacity build<strong>in</strong>g. This community <strong>of</strong>fers an environment <strong>in</strong> which members<br />

can pr<strong>of</strong>essionalise <strong>the</strong>ir own quality practices up to <strong>the</strong> po<strong>in</strong>t <strong>of</strong> certification <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir programmes or even<br />

certification <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir whole <strong>in</strong>stitution. One possible activity with<strong>in</strong> this community concerns <strong>the</strong> shar<strong>in</strong>g<br />

<strong>of</strong> experiences and best practices and aggregat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>se experiences <strong>in</strong>to benchmark<strong>in</strong>g and bench-learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />

processes. The ECBCheck criteria analyse a wide variety <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>dicators, all conta<strong>in</strong>ed <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> openly available<br />

toolkit.<br />

Although each <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se <strong>in</strong>struments had many useful components, <strong>the</strong> project support team felt that no s<strong>in</strong>gle<br />

<strong>in</strong>strument among <strong>the</strong>se would meet <strong>the</strong> needs <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> external review process, but would be highly useful to <strong>in</strong>form<br />

<strong>the</strong> design <strong>of</strong> a new <strong>in</strong>strument to suit <strong>the</strong> project context. The perceived need was largely to identify areas that<br />

needed improvement and facilitate <strong>the</strong> communication <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>formation/feedback to course developers <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

7


Embedd<strong>in</strong>g Quality Improvement <strong>in</strong> Onl<strong>in</strong>e Courses:<br />

A case study <strong>of</strong> seven African universities<br />

most user-friendly way. The team <strong>the</strong>refore comb<strong>in</strong>ed elements from <strong>the</strong> above <strong>in</strong>struments to create an easy-touse<br />

<strong>in</strong>strument that would meet <strong>the</strong> needs <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> project.<br />

Four broad areas were identified to focus on <strong>in</strong> terms <strong>of</strong> quality:<br />

A. Course design: The course has clear learn<strong>in</strong>g outcomes that are appropriate to <strong>the</strong> level <strong>of</strong> study and <strong>the</strong><br />

content; <strong>the</strong> teach<strong>in</strong>g, learn<strong>in</strong>g and assessment methods encourage <strong>the</strong> achievement <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> course aims and<br />

outcomes. The course design encourages active learn<strong>in</strong>g and collaboration. The course has clearly def<strong>in</strong>ed<br />

learn<strong>in</strong>g pathways that students should follow to meet <strong>the</strong>ir needs as well as <strong>the</strong> learn<strong>in</strong>g outcomes <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> course.<br />

B. Course activities: Course activities are designed <strong>in</strong> such a way that <strong>the</strong>y are aligned with course outcomes, have<br />

clearly def<strong>in</strong>ed objectives, encourage active learn<strong>in</strong>g, and cover different levels <strong>of</strong> cognitive skill. Examples <strong>of</strong><br />

such learn<strong>in</strong>g activities could be assignments and quizzes.<br />

C. Assessment: Course assessment is designed <strong>in</strong> such a way that it is aligned with course outcomes, has clearly<br />

def<strong>in</strong>ed objectives, and covers different levels <strong>of</strong> cognitive skill.<br />

D. Technology: The technology used <strong>in</strong> teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g is appropriate, up to date, and readily accessible to<br />

students and staff. The type <strong>of</strong> technology used is guided by <strong>the</strong> pedagogical approach <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> provider.<br />

Each <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> four quality areas consists <strong>of</strong> several quality elements, with <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>strument compris<strong>in</strong>g 34 quality<br />

elements <strong>in</strong> all. These elements are shown <strong>in</strong> Table 1.<br />

Table 1: The 34 elements <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> review <strong>in</strong>strument<br />

A: Course design<br />

Introduction elements<br />

1 A clear course title and short description are provided.<br />

2<br />

Students are provided with a clear picture <strong>of</strong> what will be <strong>in</strong>volved <strong>in</strong> tak<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> course and <strong>the</strong><br />

expectations that will be placed on <strong>the</strong>m.<br />

3 Instructions <strong>in</strong>dicate how <strong>the</strong> student can access support <strong>of</strong> various types: academic, technical etc.<br />

Course <strong>in</strong>formation and layout elements<br />

4 The learn<strong>in</strong>g outcomes are present, specific, measurable and achievable.<br />

5<br />

Intellectual property and copyright issues are well taken care <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> course (e.g. appropriate referenc<strong>in</strong>g,<br />

use <strong>of</strong> OER – <strong>the</strong> reviewer should request and check a sample <strong>of</strong> referenc<strong>in</strong>g).<br />

6 The lecturer and <strong>the</strong> students <strong>in</strong>troduce <strong>the</strong>mselves <strong>in</strong> an appropriate manner.<br />

7<br />

8<br />

The course encourages students to evaluate <strong>the</strong> course (feedback for course improvement e.g. an<br />

evaluation form).<br />

The course <strong>in</strong>terface is designed for consistency, readability and attractiveness (e.g. use <strong>of</strong> pictures, icons,<br />

consistency <strong>of</strong> head<strong>in</strong>gs, font size, colour and spac<strong>in</strong>g).<br />

9 The <strong>in</strong>terface has no <strong>in</strong>formation overload and has <strong>in</strong>ternal l<strong>in</strong>ks to <strong>the</strong> necessary additional <strong>in</strong>formation.<br />

10 The course is easily navigable and navigation is clearly <strong>in</strong>dicated.<br />

8<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


Embedd<strong>in</strong>g Quality Improvement <strong>in</strong> Onl<strong>in</strong>e Courses:<br />

A case study <strong>of</strong> seven African universities<br />

Learn<strong>in</strong>g and teach<strong>in</strong>g strategy elements<br />

11 The learn<strong>in</strong>g and teach<strong>in</strong>g or pedagogical approach guides <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> technology.<br />

12<br />

13<br />

14<br />

15<br />

There is a clear learn<strong>in</strong>g pathway built <strong>in</strong>to <strong>the</strong> course. (The learn<strong>in</strong>g pathway is an <strong>in</strong>tegration <strong>of</strong><br />

appropriate content – i.e. learn<strong>in</strong>g resources – learn<strong>in</strong>g activities, guided feedback on activities, and<br />

l<strong>in</strong>ked assessment activities, all <strong>of</strong> which enable students to achieve <strong>the</strong> specified outcomes <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> course.)<br />

The course content is accurate, up to date and pitched ‘appropriately to <strong>the</strong> level <strong>of</strong> study’ and ‘at <strong>the</strong><br />

right educational level’ <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> target group.<br />

The course design recognises <strong>the</strong> diversity <strong>of</strong> students e.g. sensitivity to gender/ethnic/cultural aspects<br />

<strong>of</strong> teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> language and examples used.<br />

The course design promotes and supports collaborative learn<strong>in</strong>g (e.g. has collaborative learn<strong>in</strong>g tools<br />

such as blogs and discussion forums).<br />

16 The course is designed <strong>in</strong> such a way that students feel <strong>the</strong> ‘presence <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> teacher’.<br />

17<br />

The course is designed <strong>in</strong> such a way that it facilitates <strong>in</strong>dividual study and <strong>the</strong> development <strong>of</strong> study<br />

skills.<br />

18 The course conta<strong>in</strong>s a useful glossary.<br />

B: Course activities<br />

19<br />

20<br />

21<br />

Activities are pitched at <strong>the</strong> appropriate level <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> course. Activities cover different cognitive and<br />

practical skills (where <strong>in</strong>dicated) <strong>in</strong> l<strong>in</strong>e with <strong>the</strong> course outcomes.<br />

The course <strong>of</strong>fers ample opportunities for <strong>in</strong>teraction and communication with o<strong>the</strong>r students, with <strong>the</strong><br />

<strong>in</strong>structor, and with <strong>the</strong> content.<br />

The purpose/objective <strong>of</strong> each activity is clearly spelled out to enable students to understand what<br />

knowledge, skills and values <strong>the</strong>y are expected to learn or demonstrate.<br />

22 Students are provided with guidance on how long <strong>the</strong>y should take to complete each activity.<br />

23<br />

There are clear <strong>in</strong>structions on how students should undertake <strong>the</strong> activities and what resources <strong>the</strong>y<br />

should use.<br />

24 There are clear <strong>in</strong>structions on how and when students should expect feedback.<br />

C: Assessment<br />

25 There is upfront <strong>in</strong>formation on how students will be assessed on <strong>the</strong> course.<br />

26<br />

27<br />

Assessment tasks are appropriately paced <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> course to enable students to gauge <strong>the</strong>ir mastery <strong>of</strong> all<br />

<strong>the</strong> concepts <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> course.<br />

Assessment tasks are stated clearly enough for students to know how <strong>the</strong>y should respond and <strong>the</strong><br />

resources <strong>the</strong>y should use to do <strong>the</strong>m.<br />

28 Assessment tasks cover different levels <strong>of</strong> cognitive skills and are appropriately pitched.<br />

29 Timely feedback is provided on assessment tasks.<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

9


Embedd<strong>in</strong>g Quality Improvement <strong>in</strong> Onl<strong>in</strong>e Courses:<br />

A case study <strong>of</strong> seven African universities<br />

D: Technology<br />

30 The learn<strong>in</strong>g and teach<strong>in</strong>g or pedagogical approach guides <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> technology.<br />

31<br />

32<br />

Wherever possible, a range <strong>of</strong> technologies – such as forums, chats, wikis, blogs etc. – are used to support<br />

learn<strong>in</strong>g, and <strong>the</strong>se technologies are appropriate for <strong>the</strong> pedagogical approach chosen.<br />

There are suitable multimedia objects – such as illustrations, video clips, PowerPo<strong>in</strong>t slides, animations,<br />

simulations – to facilitate understand<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> content.<br />

33 There is seamless <strong>in</strong>tegration <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> different multimedia elements <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> course.<br />

34 Internal and external hyperl<strong>in</strong>ks are provided and <strong>the</strong>y are always active.<br />

The external reviewers were <strong>in</strong>vited to review <strong>the</strong> draft <strong>in</strong>strument and provide suggestions for improvement prior<br />

to deployment. This enabled <strong>the</strong> external reviewers to become familiar with <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>strument, seek clarification<br />

where required and provide <strong>in</strong>put <strong>in</strong>to <strong>the</strong> design <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> f<strong>in</strong>al <strong>in</strong>strument. Subsequent to this, a draft <strong>in</strong>strument<br />

was circulated to course developers at participat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>stitutions. The <strong>in</strong>tention was to enable course developers to<br />

be fully aware <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> review criteria as well as check <strong>the</strong>ir understand<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>strument. The external project<br />

support team also encouraged course developers to use <strong>the</strong> review <strong>in</strong>strument for self-evaluation purposes with<br />

respect to <strong>the</strong>ir own courses. The f<strong>in</strong>al review <strong>in</strong>strument was <strong>the</strong>n circulated for <strong>the</strong> external review process after<br />

updates had been made. For example, course reviewers and developers were not clear on one element regard<strong>in</strong>g<br />

<strong>the</strong> mean<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> a ‘learn<strong>in</strong>g pathway’. A def<strong>in</strong>ition <strong>of</strong> learn<strong>in</strong>g pathway was <strong>the</strong>n <strong>in</strong>cluded <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> element.<br />

Identification <strong>of</strong> expert reviewers<br />

It was important to identify a group <strong>of</strong> external reviewers early on so that <strong>the</strong>y could provide formative <strong>in</strong>put to<br />

<strong>the</strong> review <strong>in</strong>strument before mak<strong>in</strong>g use <strong>of</strong> it. Reviewers were selected from a variety <strong>of</strong> African countries as <strong>the</strong><br />

project was tak<strong>in</strong>g place with<strong>in</strong> this context. The selection criteria used to assemble <strong>the</strong> team were <strong>the</strong>ir expertise<br />

<strong>in</strong> and prior experience with onl<strong>in</strong>e course design, development and facilitation. The reviewers were not necessarily<br />

selected on <strong>the</strong> basis <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir expertise <strong>in</strong> subject content as <strong>the</strong> focus <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> review process was on course design and<br />

not content. In order to ensure anonymity between reviewers and course developers and avoid any potential bias,<br />

no reviewers were selected from <strong>the</strong> participat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>stitutions. The reviewers selected consisted <strong>of</strong> seven academic<br />

staff from various sub-Saharan Africa higher education <strong>in</strong>stitutions, and five educational consultants.<br />

Identification <strong>of</strong> courses for review<br />

Institutional project leaders and course developers were requested to identify completed courses to submit for<br />

external review. In total, 136 courses were received from all <strong>the</strong> participat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>stitutions. The courses received<br />

tended to correspond roughly to <strong>the</strong> total number <strong>of</strong> courses be<strong>in</strong>g developed at each <strong>in</strong>stitution under <strong>the</strong> <strong>PHEA</strong><br />

ETI. For each course, <strong>in</strong>stitutions were required to submit <strong>the</strong> course code and name, <strong>the</strong> site URL, and guest<br />

access log<strong>in</strong> details. Guest access was provided so that no changes to <strong>the</strong> course could be made <strong>in</strong>advertently and<br />

live courses would not be compromised. Prior to course allocation to reviewers, <strong>the</strong> external project support team<br />

checked <strong>the</strong> au<strong>the</strong>nticity <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> courses and access details provided, <strong>in</strong> order to m<strong>in</strong>imise any access problems; it<br />

was found that <strong>in</strong> some <strong>in</strong>stances <strong>in</strong>complete or blank course details had been sent.<br />

Phase 4: External review<br />

Course allocation for review<br />

The project support team created a composite review register to track <strong>the</strong> progress <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> reviews. The register<br />

conta<strong>in</strong>ed a list per <strong>in</strong>stitution <strong>of</strong> courses submitted for review, <strong>the</strong> allocated reviewer, date sent for review, expected<br />

10<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


Embedd<strong>in</strong>g Quality Improvement <strong>in</strong> Onl<strong>in</strong>e Courses:<br />

A case study <strong>of</strong> seven African universities<br />

date <strong>of</strong> feedback, and actual date feedback was received. This was helpful as courses were received from <strong>in</strong>stitutions<br />

and reviewers at different times. The register also recorded when reviews were mediated and when <strong>the</strong> feedback<br />

was sent to <strong>in</strong>stitutions.<br />

Reviewers were allocated courses <strong>in</strong> different stages. Reviewers were <strong>in</strong>itially given a limited number <strong>of</strong> courses<br />

to review to be able to get a sense <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> usefulness <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir review and feedback comments, and assess <strong>the</strong>ir time<br />

management capability. Reviewers were provided with clear <strong>in</strong>structions for undertak<strong>in</strong>g reviews. In brief, <strong>the</strong>se<br />

<strong>in</strong>structions <strong>in</strong>cluded:<br />

• Background to <strong>the</strong> review process and how to complete <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>strument;<br />

• Guidel<strong>in</strong>es for time to take for reviews and <strong>the</strong> nature <strong>of</strong> comments expected; and<br />

• The date review feedback was expected.<br />

External review <strong>of</strong> courses<br />

Reviewers were required to review each course aga<strong>in</strong>st <strong>the</strong> 34 quality elements and provide a rat<strong>in</strong>g for each element,<br />

as well as a comment clarify<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> status <strong>of</strong> each <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> elements. The rat<strong>in</strong>g scale used was to select <strong>the</strong> rat<strong>in</strong>g<br />

that best matched <strong>the</strong> element statement. Figure 2 illustrates an extract from <strong>the</strong> review <strong>in</strong>strument.<br />

Figure 2: Extract from <strong>the</strong> course review <strong>in</strong>strument<br />

Rat<strong>in</strong>gs: Select a check box that best fits <strong>the</strong> criterion. You may place only one tick per statement.<br />

0 = 'Not at all'<br />

1= ' A little bit'<br />

2 = ' A fair amount'<br />

3 = 'To a large extent'<br />

A<br />

Course Design: The course has clear learn<strong>in</strong>g outcomes that are appropriate to <strong>the</strong> level <strong>of</strong> study and <strong>the</strong> content; teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g and assessment methods<br />

encourage <strong>the</strong> achievement <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> course aims and outcomes. The course design encourages active learn<strong>in</strong>g and collaboration. The course has clearly def<strong>in</strong>ed learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />

pathways learners have to follow to meet <strong>the</strong>ir needs as well as <strong>the</strong> learn<strong>in</strong>g outcomes <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> course.<br />

Introduction Elements 0 1 2 3 Comments<br />

1 A clear course title and short description are provided<br />

2 Students are provided with a clear picture <strong>of</strong> what will be <strong>in</strong>volved <strong>in</strong> tak<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> course<br />

and <strong>the</strong> expectations that will be placed on <strong>the</strong>m<br />

3 Instructions <strong>in</strong>dicate how <strong>the</strong> student can access support <strong>of</strong> various types: academic,<br />

technical etc<br />

Additionally, once reviewers had completed <strong>the</strong> review aga<strong>in</strong>st <strong>the</strong> 34 quality elements, <strong>the</strong> review <strong>in</strong>strument<br />

conta<strong>in</strong>ed a summary tab for reviewers to write general comments for each <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> four broad areas <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> review<br />

<strong>in</strong> terms <strong>of</strong> strengths identified, areas for improvement identified and overall recommendations.<br />

Mediation <strong>of</strong> feedback<br />

As <strong>the</strong> completed reviews were received from <strong>the</strong> reviewers, <strong>the</strong> external project support team checked that <strong>the</strong><br />

reviewer had completed all sections <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>strument and, where necessary, mediated <strong>the</strong> feedback <strong>in</strong> terms <strong>of</strong><br />

add<strong>in</strong>g or edit<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> comments. This was to ensure <strong>the</strong> comments could be usefully <strong>in</strong>terpreted <strong>in</strong> all cases. The<br />

project support team sent <strong>the</strong> review feedback to <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional project leaders, who <strong>the</strong>n distributed <strong>the</strong> feedback<br />

to <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>dividual course developers.<br />

Phase 5: Course revision<br />

Once course developers had received <strong>the</strong>ir course feedback, <strong>the</strong>y could look at address<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> reviewer comments.<br />

The <strong>in</strong>stitutional project leaders, supported by <strong>the</strong> local support team, had responsibility for guid<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> course<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

11


Embedd<strong>in</strong>g Quality Improvement <strong>in</strong> Onl<strong>in</strong>e Courses:<br />

A case study <strong>of</strong> seven African universities<br />

developers <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> implementation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> feedback and ensur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> feedback was acted upon. Dur<strong>in</strong>g site visits<br />

to <strong>in</strong>stitutions, <strong>the</strong> external project support team would check <strong>the</strong> progress on course revisions with <strong>the</strong> course<br />

developers and provide fur<strong>the</strong>r support for <strong>the</strong> process. These <strong>in</strong>stitutional visits served also as catalysts for renewed<br />

impetus <strong>in</strong> terms <strong>of</strong> course improvement.<br />

Phase 6: Evaluation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> QI process<br />

Second round <strong>of</strong> reviews<br />

In order to verify improvement <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> quality <strong>of</strong> courses, each <strong>in</strong>stitution was requested to submit a limited number<br />

<strong>of</strong> courses for a second round <strong>of</strong> review us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> same review <strong>in</strong>strument. Institutions submitted a total <strong>of</strong> 20<br />

courses, which was 15% <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> courses reviewed <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> first round. The submission <strong>of</strong> courses per <strong>in</strong>stitution is<br />

shown <strong>in</strong> Table 2.<br />

Table 2: Institutional course submissions for review<br />

Institution Submitted for first review Submitted for second review<br />

Institution 1 19 2<br />

Institution 2 11 3<br />

Institution 3 6 2<br />

Institution 4 40 5<br />

Institution 5 42 4<br />

Institution 6 14 4<br />

Institution 7 4 0<br />

Total 136 20<br />

Note: The seventh <strong>in</strong>stitution did not submit any courses for <strong>the</strong> second round <strong>of</strong> reviews.<br />

The second round <strong>of</strong> reviews was conducted by <strong>the</strong> external project support team. Reference was made to <strong>the</strong><br />

feedback <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> external review. Once aga<strong>in</strong>, feedback was sent to course developers via <strong>in</strong>stitutional project leaders<br />

to act upon <strong>the</strong> comments, if and as necessary.<br />

The second review was primarily conducted to establish <strong>the</strong> extent <strong>of</strong> improvement based on weaknesses and<br />

recommendations identified <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> external review. The scor<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> each <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> 34 quality elements was compared<br />

with <strong>the</strong> scor<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> second review. These scores were <strong>the</strong>n grouped <strong>in</strong>to three categories:<br />

• Quality element was reviewed favourably by external reviewer and <strong>the</strong>refore no major improvement was<br />

required.<br />

• Quality element was reviewed unfavourably by external reviewer and an improvement was made.<br />

• Quality element was reviewed unfavourably by external reviewer and yet no improvement was made.<br />

Figure 3 shows <strong>the</strong> results <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> quality element comparisons grouped <strong>in</strong>to <strong>the</strong> three categories. Three f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs<br />

emerged from <strong>the</strong> analysis <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> second round <strong>of</strong> reviews. Firstly, it was found that most <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> courses had been<br />

reviewed favourably by <strong>the</strong> external reviewers <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> first round, as evidenced by <strong>the</strong> large proportion <strong>of</strong> quality<br />

elements where no major improvement was required. Secondly, although <strong>the</strong>re were many elements <strong>in</strong>dicat<strong>in</strong>g<br />

good quality, <strong>the</strong>re was also a lot <strong>of</strong> improvement to be made after <strong>the</strong> first round <strong>of</strong> external review. All <strong>the</strong> courses,<br />

12<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


Embedd<strong>in</strong>g Quality Improvement <strong>in</strong> Onl<strong>in</strong>e Courses:<br />

A case study <strong>of</strong> seven African universities<br />

except <strong>in</strong> one case, exhibited various degrees <strong>of</strong> improvement after <strong>the</strong> external review. Thirdly, although some<br />

improvements were made, <strong>the</strong> majority <strong>of</strong> courses cont<strong>in</strong>ued to exhibit <strong>the</strong> weaknesses <strong>in</strong>itially identified <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

external review. This may be an <strong>in</strong>dication <strong>of</strong> problems with <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>ternal quality processes.<br />

Figure 3: Quality element comparisons after <strong>the</strong> second review<br />

30<br />

25<br />

20<br />

15<br />

10<br />

No improvement<br />

after review<br />

Improvement<br />

after review<br />

No improvement<br />

needed<br />

5<br />

0<br />

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20<br />

Institution<br />

1<br />

Institution<br />

2<br />

Institution<br />

3<br />

Institution<br />

4<br />

Institution<br />

5<br />

Institution<br />

6<br />

Review reflection and feedback<br />

In order to validate <strong>the</strong> impact <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> QI process, feedback was obta<strong>in</strong>ed from <strong>the</strong> stakeholders <strong>in</strong>volved. Course<br />

developers and <strong>in</strong>stitutional project leaders were sent a l<strong>in</strong>k to an onl<strong>in</strong>e survey to evaluate <strong>the</strong> QI process us<strong>in</strong>g<br />

a set <strong>of</strong> structured questions. Only 30 out <strong>of</strong> about 100 course developers responded to <strong>the</strong> survey. The external<br />

reviewers were required to complete a short questionnaire based on <strong>the</strong> courses <strong>the</strong>y had reviewed. The questions<br />

were:<br />

1. What is your general op<strong>in</strong>ion on <strong>the</strong> quality <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> courses?<br />

2. What are <strong>the</strong> common strengths?<br />

3. What are <strong>the</strong> common area(s) that need improvement?<br />

4. What suggestions do you make for improv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> evaluation <strong>in</strong>strument?<br />

F<strong>in</strong>ally, <strong>the</strong> project support team members submitted short reflection reports on <strong>the</strong> process and outcomes <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

QI process. The analysis <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> feedback from <strong>the</strong> various stakeholder groups is discussed <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> follow<strong>in</strong>g section.<br />

SUCCESSES AND CHALLENGES<br />

Successes experienced<br />

The positive feedback from <strong>the</strong> course developers <strong>in</strong>dicated <strong>the</strong> follow<strong>in</strong>g:<br />

• The categories and quality elements used <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> review made sense (accord<strong>in</strong>g to 89% <strong>of</strong> those who responded);<br />

• The external review process helped to improve <strong>the</strong> quality <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir onl<strong>in</strong>e courses (accord<strong>in</strong>g to 83% <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

respondents); and<br />

• The reviews validated <strong>the</strong> learn<strong>in</strong>g design approach taken dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>itial design <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir courses <strong>in</strong> terms <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> structure and tools (accord<strong>in</strong>g to most <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> respondents).<br />

Feedback from <strong>the</strong> external reviewers <strong>in</strong>dicated that generally <strong>the</strong> courses reviewed were <strong>of</strong> good quality and<br />

provided students with <strong>the</strong> basic elements that one would expect to f<strong>in</strong>d <strong>in</strong> an onl<strong>in</strong>e course. Reviewers commented<br />

that <strong>the</strong> courses were a good start from first-time onl<strong>in</strong>e course developers. The follow<strong>in</strong>g were found to be common<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

13


Embedd<strong>in</strong>g Quality Improvement <strong>in</strong> Onl<strong>in</strong>e Courses:<br />

A case study <strong>of</strong> seven African universities<br />

areas <strong>of</strong> strength <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> courses:<br />

• Most <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> courses had a consistent, easy-to-navigate layout;<br />

• The courses provided students with an opportunity for collaborative discussions and activities;<br />

• The onl<strong>in</strong>e teach<strong>in</strong>g approach was emphasised and <strong>in</strong>structors created elements to establish <strong>the</strong> presence <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> ‘teacher’;<br />

• The use <strong>of</strong> visual aids was good (although overused <strong>in</strong> some courses);<br />

• Course <strong>in</strong>troductory matter was clearly <strong>in</strong>dicated, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>dications for opportunities <strong>of</strong> support (academic<br />

and technical) be<strong>in</strong>g provided <strong>in</strong> most courses; and<br />

• The courses provided a clear l<strong>in</strong>k between <strong>the</strong> course objectives and <strong>the</strong> resources and learn<strong>in</strong>g activities.<br />

Feedback from <strong>the</strong> external project support team <strong>in</strong>dicated that <strong>the</strong> QI process had been a worthwhile exercise<br />

<strong>in</strong> assur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> quality <strong>of</strong> courses and that for course developers it had embedded notions <strong>of</strong> quality. It was noted<br />

that <strong>the</strong> careful plann<strong>in</strong>g and coord<strong>in</strong>ation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> QI process, although requir<strong>in</strong>g significant time and effort, was<br />

critical to <strong>the</strong> success <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> process. It was also noted that <strong>the</strong> ref<strong>in</strong>ement <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> review <strong>in</strong>strument dur<strong>in</strong>g this<br />

process had led to a tool that can be used and adapted for a variety <strong>of</strong> review contexts. 2<br />

Challenges encountered<br />

The follow<strong>in</strong>g key challenges were <strong>in</strong>dicated by <strong>in</strong>stitutional course developers:<br />

• They did not see <strong>the</strong> review criteria prior to submitt<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>ir courses for external review (this was accord<strong>in</strong>g<br />

to 39% <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> course developers). This suggests communication problems between <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional project<br />

leaders and <strong>the</strong> course developers;<br />

• They did not have <strong>the</strong> criteria sufficiently expla<strong>in</strong>ed to <strong>the</strong>m by <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional support team before <strong>the</strong> review<br />

was conducted (this was accord<strong>in</strong>g to 33% <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> respondents);<br />

• Feedback from external course reviewers was not passed on to <strong>the</strong>m by <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional coord<strong>in</strong>ator who<br />

received <strong>the</strong> feedback from <strong>the</strong> external project support team (accord<strong>in</strong>g to 6% <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> respondents); and<br />

• They did not have sufficient time to address <strong>the</strong> feedback before <strong>the</strong> second round <strong>of</strong> reviews was due (a few<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> respondents reported thus).<br />

Feedback from <strong>the</strong> external reviewers <strong>in</strong>dicated that although <strong>the</strong> good quality was noted, <strong>the</strong>re was ample room<br />

for fur<strong>the</strong>r improvement. A particular area <strong>of</strong> attention noted by <strong>the</strong> reviewers was that <strong>of</strong> preferred pedagogical<br />

approaches, which should be guided by both <strong>the</strong> nature <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> courses and <strong>the</strong> target audience’s entrance knowledge,<br />

skills, attitudes, and aspirations.<br />

The reviewers identified <strong>the</strong> follow<strong>in</strong>g common areas <strong>of</strong> weakness need<strong>in</strong>g improvement:<br />

• A lack <strong>of</strong> visible <strong>in</strong>teractive sessions;<br />

• A lack <strong>of</strong> provision for course evaluation <strong>in</strong> order to get feedback from students on <strong>the</strong>ir experience <strong>of</strong> tak<strong>in</strong>g<br />

part <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> course;<br />

• A shortage <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> multimedia elements such as videos (<strong>in</strong> some cases <strong>the</strong>se were not <strong>of</strong> a satisfactory<br />

quality);<br />

• A lack <strong>of</strong> clear <strong>in</strong>dication <strong>of</strong> how much time students would need to complete assignments and activities;<br />

• A number <strong>of</strong> broken hyperl<strong>in</strong>ks that needed to be fixed;<br />

• Poor acknowledgement <strong>of</strong> reference materials (especially diagrams) from o<strong>the</strong>r sources; and<br />

• Although <strong>the</strong> courses started well, <strong>the</strong> quality <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> courses tended to dim<strong>in</strong>ish by <strong>the</strong> end <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> course. This<br />

<strong>in</strong>dicated a need for course developers to ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong> consistent focus and commitment to quality.<br />

2 The onl<strong>in</strong>e course review <strong>in</strong>strument has s<strong>in</strong>ce been revised by <strong>the</strong> Saide project team and released on <strong>the</strong> Saide website under an open licence.<br />

14<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


Embedd<strong>in</strong>g Quality Improvement <strong>in</strong> Onl<strong>in</strong>e Courses:<br />

A case study <strong>of</strong> seven African universities<br />

The external project support team feedback <strong>in</strong>dicated several challenges experienced dur<strong>in</strong>g this process:<br />

• The limited time availability <strong>of</strong> course developers and reviewers due to <strong>the</strong>ir o<strong>the</strong>r <strong>in</strong>stitutional responsibilities<br />

led to significant delays <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> development and review process;<br />

• Some developers had very little expertise <strong>in</strong> course design, which led to pedagogical challenges that <strong>in</strong>hibited<br />

good onl<strong>in</strong>e course design; and<br />

• Communications with and with<strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutions was sometimes a major problem, particularly experienced<br />

between <strong>in</strong>stitutional project leaders and <strong>the</strong> course developers.<br />

LESSONS LEARNED<br />

There are a number <strong>of</strong> lessons <strong>of</strong> experience that can be drawn from <strong>the</strong> QI process undertaken <strong>in</strong> this <strong>in</strong>itiative:<br />

1. Capacity development <strong>in</strong> course design: Although effort had been made, <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> design <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> capacity-build<strong>in</strong>g<br />

<strong>in</strong>terventions, to <strong>in</strong>clude a focus on pedagogical considerations, it became clear that some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> factors limit<strong>in</strong>g<br />

<strong>the</strong> quality <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> onl<strong>in</strong>e course development were due to pedagogical challenges experienced by some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

course developers. For future capacity-build<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>terventions it is recommended that more time be allocated<br />

to this.<br />

2. Quality as a cont<strong>in</strong>ual process: An important po<strong>in</strong>t <strong>the</strong> external project support team needed to share with<br />

<strong>the</strong> course developers was that for <strong>the</strong> most part a high quality course cannot be achieved dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>itial<br />

development and review <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> course; ra<strong>the</strong>r, <strong>the</strong> quality <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> courses would be improved over time, dur<strong>in</strong>g<br />

<strong>the</strong> subsequent delivery <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> course to students and as a result <strong>of</strong> subsequent iterations <strong>of</strong> course revision. As<br />

Uvalić-Trumbić and Daniel (2013) note, quality enhancement will occur only ‘when <strong>the</strong> lessons from evaluation<br />

are reflected <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> next <strong>of</strong>fer<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> course’.<br />

3. Allocation <strong>of</strong> reviewers: Although <strong>the</strong> availability <strong>of</strong> reviewers was limited, it was necessary to select a sufficient<br />

number <strong>of</strong> reviewers so that <strong>the</strong> allocation <strong>of</strong> reviews could be fairly distributed and occur with<strong>in</strong> an expected<br />

timeframe. In most cases, <strong>the</strong> turnaround time for reviews was longer than anticipated. Ano<strong>the</strong>r aspect to<br />

consider is <strong>the</strong> distribution <strong>of</strong> courses. It was found that it was best to distribute courses from one <strong>in</strong>stitution<br />

to more than one reviewer. This is because different reviewers tend to prioritise certa<strong>in</strong> aspects <strong>of</strong> course design.<br />

Additionally, <strong>in</strong> this process reviewers were selected based on <strong>the</strong>ir expertise <strong>in</strong> onl<strong>in</strong>e course design; it may<br />

be advantageous <strong>in</strong> future though to obta<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> services <strong>of</strong> reviewers who are also discipl<strong>in</strong>e experts and who<br />

are thus able to provide a comprehensive evaluation, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> actual content.<br />

4. Communication: Several communication challenges were experienced <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> implementation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> QI process.<br />

It was discovered that part <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> challenge was <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional e-mails. Regular follow-ups had to be<br />

made via alternative e-mail addresses as well as via telephone. Additionally a communication protocol needed<br />

to be established to ensure regular communication between <strong>the</strong> project team members with<strong>in</strong> an <strong>in</strong>stitution.<br />

5. Mediation <strong>of</strong> feedback: The project support team determ<strong>in</strong>ed it was important to check and mediate <strong>the</strong><br />

feedback from reviewers before send<strong>in</strong>g it on to <strong>the</strong> course developers. This was to ensure that <strong>the</strong> feedback<br />

could be clearly understood and that <strong>the</strong> tone was consistently constructive.<br />

6. Local support and motivation: Due to <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional commitments <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> course developers, <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional<br />

support team was vital <strong>in</strong> ensur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> cont<strong>in</strong>ued focus on quality improvement. The <strong>in</strong>stitutional support<br />

teams provided encouragement and guidance to ensure <strong>the</strong> susta<strong>in</strong>ability <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> QI process.<br />

7. Institutional quality processes: In many <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutions, <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>ternal processes for quality improvement are<br />

ei<strong>the</strong>r not clearly prescribed or not well understood. This led to challenges with regard to differ<strong>in</strong>g expectations<br />

regard<strong>in</strong>g quality and <strong>the</strong> completion <strong>of</strong> quality-related activities.<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

15


Embedd<strong>in</strong>g Quality Improvement <strong>in</strong> Onl<strong>in</strong>e Courses:<br />

A case study <strong>of</strong> seven African universities<br />

CONCLUSION<br />

This case study exam<strong>in</strong>ed <strong>the</strong> QI process undertaken to ensure high quality project outputs with<strong>in</strong> a large,<br />

distributed educational technology project. The QI process that was developed aimed at improv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> quality<br />

<strong>of</strong> onl<strong>in</strong>e courses developed as part <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI. Quality was an element built <strong>in</strong>to <strong>the</strong> course development<br />

process. Several rounds <strong>of</strong> review were undertaken <strong>in</strong> order to ensure quality improvement. It is acknowledged that<br />

<strong>the</strong> process <strong>of</strong> quality improvement does not occur <strong>in</strong> a s<strong>in</strong>gle cycle but is a cont<strong>in</strong>ual effort. In total, 136 courses<br />

were reviewed from <strong>the</strong> seven participat<strong>in</strong>g sub-Saharan African higher education <strong>in</strong>stitutions. As an outcome <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> project, <strong>the</strong>se <strong>in</strong>stitutions will release a proportion <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> courses (or elements <strong>of</strong> courses) that have undergone<br />

review as OER, to be made available to o<strong>the</strong>r <strong>in</strong>stitutions to adapt and share. Such collaboration and shar<strong>in</strong>g will<br />

not only improve <strong>the</strong> quality <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> resources but will also cont<strong>in</strong>ue to build capacity <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> educational<br />

technologies <strong>in</strong> African universities.<br />

The course review <strong>in</strong>strument has been ref<strong>in</strong>ed from <strong>the</strong> feedback obta<strong>in</strong>ed and, as already mentioned, is available<br />

as an OER on <strong>the</strong> Saide website. Course developers are encouraged to use and adapt <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>strument for quality<br />

improvement processes. It is anticipated <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional quality assurance units will cont<strong>in</strong>ue to work toge<strong>the</strong>r<br />

with course developers <strong>in</strong> order to ref<strong>in</strong>e quality assurance frameworks for onl<strong>in</strong>e course design and delivery.<br />

REFERENCES<br />

eCampusAlberta (2012). Quality suite. Retrieved 15 December 2013 from www.ecampusalberta.ca/members/<br />

member-resources/quality-suite<br />

European Foundation for Quality <strong>in</strong> e-Learn<strong>in</strong>g (2011). OPEN e-learn<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> capacity build<strong>in</strong>g (ECB) check.<br />

Retrieved 15 December 2013 from www.ecb-check.org/criteria-2<br />

Grifoll, J., Huertas, A. P., Rodriguez, S., Rub<strong>in</strong>, Y., Mulder, F., & Ossiannilsson, E. (2010). Quality assurance on<br />

e-learn<strong>in</strong>g. European Association for Quality Assurance (ENQA) workshop report.<br />

Jung, I. & Latchem, C. (Eds) (2012). Quality assurance and accreditation <strong>in</strong> distance education and e-learn<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

Routledge, London.<br />

Monterey Institute for Technology and <strong>Education</strong> (2010). Onl<strong>in</strong>e Course Evaluation Project (OCEP). Retrieved 15<br />

December 2013 from www.monterey<strong>in</strong>stitute.org/pdf/OCEP Evaluation Categories.pdf<br />

Quality Matters Program (2011). <strong>Higher</strong> ed program rubric. Retrieved 15 December 2013 from www.qualitymatters.<br />

org/rubric<br />

Uvalić-Trumbić, S. & Daniel, J. (Eds) (2013). A guide to quality <strong>in</strong> onl<strong>in</strong>e learn<strong>in</strong>g. Academic partnerships. Retrieved 15<br />

December 2013 from www.contactnorth.ca/sites/default/files/tips-tools/A Guide to Quality <strong>in</strong> Onl<strong>in</strong>e Learn<strong>in</strong>g.pdf<br />

16<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


Embedd<strong>in</strong>g Quality Improvement <strong>in</strong> Onl<strong>in</strong>e Courses:<br />

A case study <strong>of</strong> seven African universities<br />

APPENDIX: SUMMARY OF EXTERNAL REVIEW PROCESS<br />

EXTERNAL REVIEWERS<br />

Evaluate<br />

Review<br />

Instrument<br />

Conduct<br />

Reviews<br />

Short<br />

Reviewer<br />

Reports<br />

PROJECT SUPPORT<br />

Ref<strong>in</strong>ed<br />

Review<br />

Instrument<br />

Identify<br />

External<br />

Reviewers<br />

Develop<br />

Review<br />

Instrument<br />

Update<br />

Review<br />

Instrument<br />

Create<br />

Review<br />

Register<br />

Au<strong>the</strong>nticate<br />

and<br />

Batch<br />

Courses<br />

Allocate<br />

Courses to<br />

Reviewers<br />

Mediate<br />

Feedback<br />

Check<br />

Progress<br />

on Site<br />

Visits<br />

Review<br />

Updated<br />

Courses<br />

Send 2 nd<br />

Review<br />

Feedback<br />

Consolidate<br />

F<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs<br />

Recommendations<br />

Report<br />

INSTITUTION SUPPORT<br />

Evaluate<br />

Review<br />

Instrument<br />

Distribute<br />

Review<br />

Instrument<br />

Identify<br />

Courses<br />

for Review<br />

Send<br />

Access<br />

Details<br />

Interpret<br />

Feedback<br />

Support<br />

Changes<br />

Select<br />

Sample for<br />

2 nd Review<br />

Review<br />

Usefulness<br />

Survey<br />

COURSE DEVELOPERS<br />

Self<br />

Review <strong>of</strong><br />

Courses<br />

Identify<br />

Courses<br />

for Review<br />

Understand<br />

Feedback<br />

Update<br />

Courses<br />

Review<br />

Usefulness<br />

Survey<br />

TEAMS PREPARATION FOR EXTERNAL REVIEW EXTERNAL REVIEW<br />

COURSE<br />

VALIDATION OF EXTERNAL REVIEW<br />

REVISION<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

17


Determ<strong>in</strong>ants <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Successful Diffusion <strong>of</strong> Technology Innovations <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong><br />

<strong>Education</strong> Institutions <strong>in</strong> Africa: A social network approach<br />

Determ<strong>in</strong>ants <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Successful<br />

Diffusion <strong>of</strong> Technology Innovations <strong>in</strong><br />

<strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong> Institutions <strong>in</strong> Africa:<br />

A social network approach<br />

John Kandiri<br />

Kenyatta University, Kenya<br />

jkandiri@gmail.com<br />

Joel S. Mtebe<br />

University <strong>of</strong> Dar es Salaam, Tanzania<br />

jmtebe@gmail.com<br />

ABSTRACT<br />

This study <strong>in</strong>vestigated how <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional social networks <strong>of</strong> project coord<strong>in</strong>ators and/or team leaders contributed<br />

towards <strong>the</strong> success or failure <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> 26 technology <strong>in</strong>novation diffusion projects that were implemented under <strong>the</strong><br />

Partnership for <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong> <strong>in</strong> Africa <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiative across seven higher education<br />

<strong>in</strong>stitutions <strong>in</strong> Africa. The study used 105 questionnaires, 34 face-to-face <strong>in</strong>terviews and 19 focus group<br />

discussions to survey respondents who were <strong>in</strong>volved <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> implementation <strong>of</strong> technology <strong>in</strong>novations. The<br />

study found that <strong>the</strong> appo<strong>in</strong>tment <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional project coord<strong>in</strong>ators and/or team leaders and <strong>the</strong> selection<br />

<strong>of</strong> team members were key to <strong>the</strong> success <strong>of</strong> technology <strong>in</strong>novation diffusion. Additionally, <strong>in</strong>stitutional<br />

coord<strong>in</strong>ators and/or team leaders who <strong>in</strong>cl<strong>in</strong>ed more to <strong>the</strong> centre <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir <strong>in</strong>stitutional social networks<br />

proved to be a significant factor <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> success <strong>of</strong> technology <strong>in</strong>novation implementation <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir <strong>in</strong>stitutions.<br />

The f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs <strong>of</strong> this study have significant implications for those <strong>in</strong>volved <strong>in</strong> implement<strong>in</strong>g educational<br />

technology <strong>in</strong>novation <strong>in</strong> higher education <strong>in</strong>stitutions <strong>in</strong> Africa, and may well be helpful for funders,<br />

project teams, and university management.<br />

Keywords: op<strong>in</strong>ion leaders, social network analysis, <strong>in</strong>novation diffusion, social system, Partnership for<br />

<strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong> <strong>in</strong> Africa (<strong>PHEA</strong>) <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiative (ETI)<br />

INTRODUCTION<br />

<strong>Higher</strong> education <strong>in</strong>stitutions <strong>in</strong> Africa have been adopt<strong>in</strong>g and <strong>in</strong>tegrat<strong>in</strong>g educational technologies <strong>in</strong>to teach<strong>in</strong>g<br />

and learn<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> a bid to reap some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> benefits to be had. Specifically, such benefits <strong>in</strong>clude expand<strong>in</strong>g access,<br />

reduc<strong>in</strong>g costs, and improv<strong>in</strong>g quality (L<strong>in</strong>na, 2013), as well as provid<strong>in</strong>g access to a wide range <strong>of</strong> educational<br />

resources electronically to supplement face-to-face delivery (Unw<strong>in</strong> et al., 2010). The Association <strong>of</strong> African<br />

Universities argues that proper use <strong>of</strong> educational technologies <strong>in</strong> African higher education <strong>in</strong>stitutions can reduce<br />

<strong>the</strong> knowledge, technology, and economic gaps between Africa and <strong>the</strong> rest <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> world (Farrell & Isaacs, 2007).<br />

The perceived benefits <strong>of</strong> educational technologies have motivated numerous <strong>in</strong>stitutions and <strong>in</strong>ternational<br />

agencies – such as <strong>the</strong> World Bank, <strong>the</strong> Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA), <strong>the</strong><br />

18<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


Determ<strong>in</strong>ants <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Successful Diffusion <strong>of</strong> Technology Innovations <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong><br />

<strong>Education</strong> Institutions <strong>in</strong> Africa: A social network approach<br />

United Nations <strong>Education</strong>al, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), <strong>the</strong> United Nations Development<br />

Programme (UNDP), and <strong>the</strong> United States Agency for International Development (USAID) – to pilot and<br />

implement various educational technology projects <strong>in</strong> Africa (Farrell & Isaacs, 2007). At <strong>the</strong> same time, higher<br />

education <strong>in</strong>stitutions have cont<strong>in</strong>ued to spend hundreds <strong>of</strong> thousands <strong>of</strong> dollars on establish<strong>in</strong>g computer<br />

laboratories and learn<strong>in</strong>g management systems, on capacity build<strong>in</strong>g, and on upgrad<strong>in</strong>g Internet connections<br />

(Zimmerman & Yohon, 2004). Recently, <strong>the</strong> Partnership for <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong> <strong>in</strong> Africa (<strong>PHEA</strong>) <strong>Education</strong>al<br />

Technology Initiative (ETI), funded by a consortium <strong>of</strong> American foundations and managed by <strong>the</strong> South African<br />

Institute for Distance <strong>Education</strong> (Saide), supported seven universities <strong>in</strong> Africa to <strong>in</strong>tegrate various educational<br />

technologies <strong>in</strong>to teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g (Hoosen & Butcher, 2012).<br />

Through <strong>the</strong> support <strong>of</strong> Saide, <strong>in</strong> total 26 projects were developed and funded at <strong>the</strong> seven participat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>stitutions.<br />

Dur<strong>in</strong>g project implementation, Saide provided various forms <strong>of</strong> technical and pedagogical support to participat<strong>in</strong>g<br />

<strong>in</strong>stitutions <strong>in</strong> order to enable smooth implementation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> projects. The support covered <strong>the</strong> follow<strong>in</strong>g areas:<br />

• Deployment <strong>of</strong> learn<strong>in</strong>g management systems, and technical capacity build<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> ma<strong>in</strong>tenance <strong>of</strong> such<br />

platforms;<br />

• Produc<strong>in</strong>g, pilot<strong>in</strong>g and review<strong>in</strong>g e-learn<strong>in</strong>g courses;<br />

• Build<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>structional design and technical capacity among course development teams;<br />

• Procur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> s<strong>of</strong>tware applications necessary to produce effective e-learn<strong>in</strong>g courses; and<br />

• Conduct<strong>in</strong>g research to assess <strong>the</strong> use and impact <strong>of</strong> e-learn<strong>in</strong>g on campus.<br />

The evaluation conducted at <strong>the</strong> end <strong>of</strong> project implementation showed that 16 out <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> 20 implementation<br />

projects that had onl<strong>in</strong>e courses as <strong>the</strong>ir tangible outputs had fully achieved or exceeded <strong>the</strong>ir orig<strong>in</strong>al targets<br />

(Spaven, 2013: 30). Moreover, approximately 250 onl<strong>in</strong>e course modules had been produced or improved.<br />

Some courses had been enhanced with multimedia elements to make <strong>the</strong>m <strong>in</strong>teractive. In addition, 26,520 past<br />

exam<strong>in</strong>ation papers had been digitized and made available to users. In all seven <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> participat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>stitutions,<br />

learn<strong>in</strong>g management systems – specifically, Moodle – had been <strong>in</strong>stalled and/or upgraded. Some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutions<br />

managed to develop mobile learn<strong>in</strong>g platforms, radio scripts and voic<strong>in</strong>g for 100 courses, and e-portfolio models.<br />

Four <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> 26 projects were <strong>in</strong>dependent research projects and, <strong>of</strong> those, one exceeded its orig<strong>in</strong>al targets.<br />

Despite <strong>the</strong>se successes, <strong>the</strong> implementation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se projects faced various challenges and unpredictable results.<br />

Accord<strong>in</strong>g to Spaven (2013), <strong>the</strong> majority <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> projects took longer to produce expected results than was orig<strong>in</strong>ally<br />

planned, and <strong>the</strong>y requested extension beyond 2012 to complete <strong>the</strong>ir targets. More specifically, by June 2013,<br />

eight <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> 26 projects had not fully achieved <strong>the</strong>ir targets. By <strong>the</strong> end <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> programme (December 2013), <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> 26 projects, eight had partially achieved <strong>the</strong>ir targets (Spaven, 2013: 30, 46).<br />

The failure <strong>of</strong> technology <strong>in</strong>novation implementation projects <strong>in</strong> Africa is a common phenomenon. For <strong>in</strong>stance,<br />

<strong>the</strong> project failure rate <strong>of</strong> projects implemented <strong>in</strong> Africa by <strong>the</strong> World Bank was over 50% until 2000, while<br />

Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) research discovered that 39% <strong>of</strong> World Bank projects were unsuccessful<br />

<strong>in</strong> 2010 (Ika, Diallo & Thuillier, 2012: 105). The majority <strong>of</strong> projects implemented <strong>in</strong> Africa tend to fail: ei<strong>the</strong>r<br />

totally or partially. ‘Total failure’ means <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>novation was implemented but immediately abandoned, while<br />

‘partial failure’ means major goals were unatta<strong>in</strong>ed or <strong>the</strong>re were significant undesirable outcomes (Heeks, 2002).<br />

Therefore, <strong>the</strong>re is a press<strong>in</strong>g need for <strong>in</strong>stitutions <strong>in</strong> Africa to understand what determ<strong>in</strong>es <strong>the</strong> effective<br />

implementation <strong>of</strong> technology <strong>in</strong>novation, <strong>in</strong> order to m<strong>in</strong>imize <strong>the</strong> risk <strong>of</strong> future failures. This is because failure<br />

<strong>of</strong> technology <strong>in</strong>novation projects <strong>in</strong> Africa is likely to cont<strong>in</strong>ue to be high due to limited resources such as capital<br />

and skilled labour (Heeks, 2002).<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

19


Determ<strong>in</strong>ants <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Successful Diffusion <strong>of</strong> Technology Innovations <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong><br />

<strong>Education</strong> Institutions <strong>in</strong> Africa: A social network approach<br />

Previous studies have tended to focus on <strong>the</strong> role <strong>of</strong> top management, f<strong>in</strong>ancial motivation, organizational culture,<br />

and organizational climate <strong>in</strong> determ<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g educational technology <strong>in</strong>novation implementation effectiveness<br />

(Peansupap & Walker, 2005). While empirical data shows that <strong>the</strong>se factors are determ<strong>in</strong>ants <strong>of</strong> success <strong>in</strong><br />

technology implementation, <strong>the</strong> role <strong>of</strong> social networks – and especially <strong>the</strong> role <strong>of</strong> team leaders and/or coord<strong>in</strong>ators<br />

– has not been well considered. As a result, relatively little is known about <strong>the</strong> leadership characteristics and practices<br />

that may expla<strong>in</strong> why, specifically <strong>in</strong> Africa, some educational technology <strong>in</strong>novations diffuse fast, while o<strong>the</strong>rs<br />

diffuse slowly, and yet o<strong>the</strong>rs fail – partially or totally.<br />

The objective <strong>of</strong> this case study is to <strong>in</strong>vestigate <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>fluence <strong>of</strong> social networks, and specifically <strong>the</strong> role <strong>of</strong> project<br />

leadership, on technology <strong>in</strong>novation implementation effectiveness, focus<strong>in</strong>g on <strong>the</strong> 26 projects implemented <strong>in</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> seven <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI participat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>stitutions. Specifically, <strong>the</strong> study <strong>in</strong>vestigated <strong>the</strong> follow<strong>in</strong>g:<br />

• How <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional coord<strong>in</strong>ators and team leaders were appo<strong>in</strong>ted;<br />

• How team members <strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutions were selected;<br />

• The relationship between <strong>in</strong>stitutional project coord<strong>in</strong>ators, team leaders and team members;<br />

• Team members’ perceptions <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional project coord<strong>in</strong>ators and/or team leaders; and<br />

• The motivation and fidelity <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional project coord<strong>in</strong>ators and team leaders dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> technology<br />

<strong>in</strong>novation diffusion process.<br />

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK<br />

The <strong>the</strong>ory <strong>of</strong> social networks has been widely used to expla<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> rate at which an <strong>in</strong>novation diffuses <strong>in</strong> a<br />

given context as well as to expla<strong>in</strong> why some <strong>in</strong>novations diffuse better than o<strong>the</strong>rs (Abrahamson & Rosenkopf,<br />

1997; Valente & Davis, 1999). Social network analysis has been used as an effective approach to facilitat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong><br />

dissem<strong>in</strong>ation <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>formation about new technologies and thus promot<strong>in</strong>g adoption (Mirriahi, Dawson & Hoven,<br />

2012). Rogers (1995) def<strong>in</strong>es diffusion as ‘a process by which an <strong>in</strong>novation is communicated through certa<strong>in</strong><br />

channels over time among <strong>the</strong> members <strong>of</strong> a social system’ (1995: 5). He adds that <strong>the</strong> diffusion <strong>of</strong> a new idea has<br />

four elements: <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>novation itself, communication channels, time, and members <strong>of</strong> a social system.<br />

In <strong>the</strong> context <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> current study, <strong>in</strong>novations are those outputs <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> projects implemented <strong>in</strong> seven <strong>in</strong>stitutions<br />

<strong>in</strong> Africa that were spread through various communication channels. These communication channels <strong>in</strong>clude <strong>the</strong><br />

tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g workshops and meet<strong>in</strong>gs that were carried out dur<strong>in</strong>g project implementation. Innovations normally<br />

diffuse through social networks l<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>dividuals who are <strong>in</strong>volved <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> adoption process <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutions<br />

(Abrahamson & Rosenkopf, 1997; Rogers, 2003). This group <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>dividuals is what is termed a ‘social system’.<br />

Rogers (2003) def<strong>in</strong>ed <strong>the</strong> social system as ‘a set <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>terrelated units engaged <strong>in</strong> jo<strong>in</strong>t problem solv<strong>in</strong>g to<br />

accomplish a common goal’ (2003: 23). In <strong>the</strong> <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI projects that were <strong>the</strong> focus <strong>of</strong> this case study, <strong>the</strong><br />

social system <strong>in</strong>cluded <strong>in</strong>stitutional project coord<strong>in</strong>ators, team leaders, team members, students, <strong>in</strong>structors, and<br />

o<strong>the</strong>r stakeholders who were <strong>in</strong>volved <strong>in</strong> project implementation.<br />

Rogers (2003) argues that <strong>the</strong> structure and nature <strong>of</strong> a social system has a major <strong>in</strong>fluence on <strong>in</strong>novation diffusion<br />

adoption decisions. The structure determ<strong>in</strong>es how <strong>in</strong>dividuals are <strong>in</strong>volved <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> creation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>novations<br />

and <strong>in</strong> diffusion <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>novations, as well as determ<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> types <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>novation decisions and norms with<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

system. The choice <strong>of</strong> structure <strong>of</strong> a social system depends on <strong>the</strong> nature <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>novation, <strong>the</strong> context <strong>in</strong> which <strong>the</strong><br />

<strong>in</strong>novation is diffused, and <strong>the</strong> type <strong>of</strong> users. Consequently, several types <strong>of</strong> social network exist. However, most <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI projects adopted centrally structured networks coord<strong>in</strong>ated by <strong>in</strong>stitutional project coord<strong>in</strong>ators.<br />

The coord<strong>in</strong>ators were closely assisted by <strong>in</strong>dividual team leaders, who managed day-to-day project activities.<br />

The project coord<strong>in</strong>ators were positioned at <strong>the</strong> centre <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> social network, as illustrated <strong>in</strong> Figure 1. Several<br />

20<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


Determ<strong>in</strong>ants <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Successful Diffusion <strong>of</strong> Technology Innovations <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong><br />

<strong>Education</strong> Institutions <strong>in</strong> Africa: A social network approach<br />

studies describe project coord<strong>in</strong>ators so positioned as be<strong>in</strong>g op<strong>in</strong>ion leaders (Valente & Davis, 1999). Freeman<br />

(1978) def<strong>in</strong>es <strong>the</strong> central position as hav<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> maximum possible connection to o<strong>the</strong>rs, <strong>the</strong> shortest possible<br />

path to o<strong>the</strong>r po<strong>in</strong>ts, and <strong>the</strong> m<strong>in</strong>imum distance from all o<strong>the</strong>r po<strong>in</strong>ts <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> social network. In <strong>the</strong> context <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> current study, <strong>the</strong>y are close to all <strong>in</strong>dividual team leaders, sponsors, o<strong>the</strong>r stakeholders, and <strong>the</strong> university<br />

management. Also, <strong>the</strong>y can quickly <strong>in</strong>teract and communicate with all <strong>the</strong> people <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> network without go<strong>in</strong>g<br />

through many <strong>in</strong>termediaries (Landherr, Friedl & Heidemann, 2010).<br />

Figure 1: Example <strong>of</strong> a social network <strong>in</strong> <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI projects<br />

Instructors<br />

Team members<br />

Project leaders<br />

Sponsor<br />

Students<br />

Stakeholders<br />

Institutional<br />

coord<strong>in</strong>ator<br />

Steer<strong>in</strong>g<br />

committee<br />

University<br />

management<br />

Due to <strong>the</strong>ir position, <strong>in</strong>stitutional project coord<strong>in</strong>ators are seen by team leaders, team members and o<strong>the</strong>r people<br />

<strong>in</strong>volved <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> diffusion <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>novation as a major channel for <strong>in</strong>formation (Freeman, 1978). Consequently, <strong>the</strong>y<br />

play a vital role <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> success or failure <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> project implementation. They must be will<strong>in</strong>g to be active participants<br />

<strong>in</strong> project implementation dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> diffusion process (Valente & Davis, 1999). At <strong>the</strong> same time, <strong>the</strong>y should<br />

be able to share <strong>in</strong>formation, encourage o<strong>the</strong>rs, and collaborate <strong>in</strong> different ways with all <strong>the</strong> people <strong>in</strong>volved <strong>in</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> technology <strong>in</strong>novation process at <strong>the</strong> university, <strong>in</strong> order to facilitate <strong>the</strong> adoption and use <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>novation<br />

(Hamre & Vidgen, 2008).<br />

By <strong>the</strong> same token, <strong>in</strong>stitutional project coord<strong>in</strong>ators can <strong>in</strong>hibit <strong>the</strong> implementation <strong>of</strong> a technology <strong>in</strong>novation<br />

if <strong>the</strong>y are not active, if <strong>the</strong>y distort <strong>in</strong>formation <strong>in</strong> transmission, and/or if <strong>the</strong>y are too busy to share <strong>in</strong>novation<br />

ideas with <strong>the</strong> people <strong>in</strong>volved <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> technology <strong>in</strong>novation diffusion process (Freeman, 1978; Hamre & Vidgen,<br />

2008). They may also affect <strong>the</strong> implementation <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>novation if <strong>the</strong>y are not aware <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> needs <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> project<br />

and/or are not knowledgeable about <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>novation <strong>the</strong>y are implement<strong>in</strong>g (Valente & Davis, 1999).<br />

In fact, <strong>the</strong> role <strong>of</strong> op<strong>in</strong>ion leaders <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> diffusion <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>novations is well researched and documented. For example,<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

21


Determ<strong>in</strong>ants <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Successful Diffusion <strong>of</strong> Technology Innovations <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong><br />

<strong>Education</strong> Institutions <strong>in</strong> Africa: A social network approach<br />

<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> North American context, Mirriahi et al. (2012) <strong>in</strong>vestigated <strong>the</strong> relationship between <strong>the</strong> position <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>in</strong>structors <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> departmental social network and <strong>the</strong>ir facilitation (or o<strong>the</strong>rwise) <strong>of</strong> technology adoption <strong>in</strong> higher<br />

education. Us<strong>in</strong>g a sample <strong>of</strong> 75 <strong>in</strong>structors from three departments, <strong>the</strong> study revealed that those <strong>in</strong>structors who<br />

adopted a greater number <strong>of</strong> technologies were <strong>in</strong> an <strong>in</strong>termediary position <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir departmental social network,<br />

and hence assisted with <strong>the</strong> spread<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>formation across that network.<br />

Similar conclusions were reached <strong>in</strong> studies that <strong>in</strong>vestigated <strong>the</strong> role <strong>of</strong> op<strong>in</strong>ion leaders <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> diffusion <strong>of</strong> medical<br />

nutrition <strong>in</strong>novation (Weenen, Pronker, Commandeur & Claassen, 2013), and onl<strong>in</strong>e learn<strong>in</strong>g communities (Li,<br />

Ma, Zhang & Huang, 2013). However, research on <strong>the</strong> role <strong>of</strong> coord<strong>in</strong>ators or op<strong>in</strong>ion leaders <strong>in</strong> facilitat<strong>in</strong>g<br />

<strong>in</strong>novation diffusion <strong>in</strong> educational technologies <strong>in</strong> higher education <strong>in</strong>stitutions <strong>in</strong> Africa is limited. As a result,<br />

relatively little is known about <strong>the</strong> leadership characteristics and practices that may expla<strong>in</strong> why some educational<br />

technology <strong>in</strong>novations diffuse fast while o<strong>the</strong>rs diffuse slowly or even fail <strong>in</strong> Africa.<br />

METHODOLOGY<br />

The current study used both questionnaires and <strong>in</strong>terviews. The questionnaire was distributed via e-mail. An<br />

Internet-facilitated survey was appropriate for this study due to <strong>the</strong> fact that <strong>the</strong> study was on technology adoption<br />

and all <strong>the</strong> projects be<strong>in</strong>g implemented were us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> Internet and <strong>in</strong>formation and communication technologies<br />

(<strong>ICT</strong>s). Moreover, <strong>the</strong> wide geographical spread <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> respondents made it convenient, both cost-wise and<br />

logistically, to adm<strong>in</strong>ister <strong>the</strong> questionnaire by e-mail. This also enhanced <strong>the</strong> return rate <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> questionnaires.<br />

SPSS version 17 was used <strong>in</strong> analys<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> quantitative data.<br />

For <strong>the</strong> qualitative data, 34 face-to-face <strong>in</strong>-depth <strong>in</strong>terviews and 19 focus group discussions were held. The<br />

<strong>in</strong>terviews were transcribed verbatim and <strong>the</strong>n <strong>the</strong>oretical <strong>the</strong>matic analysis was conducted. The transcribed writeup<br />

was read and re-read and <strong>the</strong> analysts extracted <strong>the</strong> overarch<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>mes.<br />

RESEARCH FINDINGS<br />

Demography<br />

Out <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> 163 targeted e-mail questionnaire respondents, 105 replies were usable for <strong>the</strong> study, giv<strong>in</strong>g a response<br />

rate <strong>of</strong> 64.4%, which is higher than similar studies <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> doma<strong>in</strong> <strong>of</strong> science implementation. The number <strong>of</strong><br />

respondents per participat<strong>in</strong>g university is shown <strong>in</strong> Figure 2.<br />

Figure 2: Questionnaire respondents, by university<br />

University <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong>, W<strong>in</strong>neba<br />

10%<br />

University <strong>of</strong> Dar es Salaam<br />

13%<br />

Catholic University <strong>of</strong> Mozambique<br />

9%<br />

Makerere University<br />

11%<br />

Kenyatta University<br />

27%<br />

University <strong>of</strong> Jos<br />

8%<br />

University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan<br />

21%<br />

22<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


Determ<strong>in</strong>ants <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Successful Diffusion <strong>of</strong> Technology Innovations <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong><br />

<strong>Education</strong> Institutions <strong>in</strong> Africa: A social network approach<br />

Figure 3: Age <strong>of</strong> respondents<br />

Under 30<br />

31 - 35<br />

36 - 40<br />

41 - 45<br />

46 - 50<br />

51 - 55<br />

56 - 60<br />

Over 60<br />

0 4 8 12 16 20<br />

As shown <strong>in</strong> Figure 3, <strong>the</strong> majority <strong>of</strong> respondents were below 45 years <strong>of</strong> age.<br />

With regard to <strong>the</strong> highest level <strong>of</strong> education among respondents, <strong>the</strong> f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs were as follows: <strong>the</strong> majority (47<br />

<strong>in</strong> number, 44.7%) had a masters degree, followed by senior lecturers (PhDs: 15 <strong>in</strong> total, at 14%). Of <strong>the</strong> PhD<br />

holders, ten were full pr<strong>of</strong>essors, and five were associate pr<strong>of</strong>essors, while undergraduate degree holders numbered<br />

13, diploma holders numbered six, and none <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> respondents were at certificate level <strong>in</strong> terms <strong>of</strong> academic<br />

qualification.<br />

In terms <strong>of</strong> level <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> skills, 12% <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> respondents had basic comput<strong>in</strong>g skills, 45% could use and develop<br />

computer applications, 25% could do some programm<strong>in</strong>g and 17% had advanced knowledge and could specify<br />

requirements.<br />

Appo<strong>in</strong>tment <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional project coord<strong>in</strong>ators and team leaders<br />

The study <strong>in</strong>vestigated how <strong>in</strong>stitutional project coord<strong>in</strong>ators were appo<strong>in</strong>ted. There were great variations between<br />

<strong>in</strong>stitutions on how <strong>the</strong> coord<strong>in</strong>ators were nom<strong>in</strong>ated to lead <strong>the</strong> <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI projects. The study revealed that<br />

57.1% <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional project coord<strong>in</strong>ators were appo<strong>in</strong>ted by <strong>the</strong> vice-chancellor (VC) <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> respective<br />

<strong>in</strong>stitutions. This was borne out by <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>terview responses <strong>of</strong> some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional project coord<strong>in</strong>ators. For<br />

<strong>in</strong>stance, <strong>the</strong> respondent from one <strong>in</strong>stitution said:<br />

When <strong>the</strong> request for participation came I was <strong>the</strong>n <strong>the</strong> act<strong>in</strong>g director <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> university <strong>ICT</strong> directorate. The<br />

VC sent a document to me for study and advice. I studied it, and advised <strong>the</strong> VC on what <strong>the</strong> document was all<br />

about, so he subsequently sent and forwarded my name to Saide as <strong>the</strong> contact for <strong>the</strong> process <strong>of</strong> whatever this<br />

project [entailed].<br />

On <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r hand, 42.9% <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional project coord<strong>in</strong>ators were <strong>the</strong> very people who had <strong>in</strong>itiated <strong>the</strong><br />

technology <strong>in</strong>novation and written <strong>the</strong> project concept note, and thus <strong>the</strong>y automatically became <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional<br />

coord<strong>in</strong>ators or team leaders. For example, when asked how he became team leader, one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> participants<br />

commented: ‘It naturally happened that people who were work<strong>in</strong>g on <strong>the</strong> proposals became <strong>the</strong> team leaders <strong>of</strong><br />

each and every proposal which <strong>the</strong>y were lead<strong>in</strong>g.’<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

23


Determ<strong>in</strong>ants <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Successful Diffusion <strong>of</strong> Technology Innovations <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong><br />

<strong>Education</strong> Institutions <strong>in</strong> Africa: A social network approach<br />

Similarly, a team leader from ano<strong>the</strong>r <strong>in</strong>stitution said:<br />

Our university exhibits a unique [opportunity] <strong>in</strong> a way that if <strong>in</strong>dividuals k<strong>in</strong>d <strong>of</strong> set up <strong>the</strong>ir <strong>in</strong>itiatives <strong>in</strong><br />

terms <strong>of</strong> project programmes <strong>the</strong>y are always given an opportunity to lead <strong>the</strong>m. So <strong>the</strong>re wasn’t any o<strong>the</strong>r meet<strong>in</strong>g<br />

that we needed to choose <strong>the</strong> leaders; automatically I became <strong>the</strong> leader <strong>of</strong> that team because I really understood<br />

what I wanted and how I wanted it.<br />

Accord<strong>in</strong>g to a respondent from ano<strong>the</strong>r <strong>in</strong>stitution:<br />

The team leaders k<strong>in</strong>d <strong>of</strong> were default <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> sense that when we started discussions with Saide <strong>the</strong>re were many,<br />

many projects; and people who fronted projects did concept notes and <strong>the</strong>n we had meet<strong>in</strong>gs, and Saide decided<br />

which projects were f<strong>in</strong>ally go<strong>in</strong>g to be funded. So <strong>the</strong> leaders <strong>of</strong> those projects which were ultimately chosen became<br />

<strong>the</strong> automatic team leaders <strong>of</strong> those projects because <strong>the</strong>y were <strong>the</strong> division bearers <strong>of</strong> those constituency projects.<br />

Regardless <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> selection criteria, <strong>the</strong> study revealed that <strong>the</strong> majority <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional project coord<strong>in</strong>ators and<br />

team leaders (60%) held a senior adm<strong>in</strong>istrative post <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> university. Some were deans, heads <strong>of</strong> department,<br />

heads <strong>of</strong> e-learn<strong>in</strong>g sections or heads <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> section <strong>in</strong> which <strong>the</strong> project was based. Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore, some <strong>of</strong> those<br />

<strong>in</strong>stitutional project coord<strong>in</strong>ators went on to appo<strong>in</strong>t project steer<strong>in</strong>g committees that would bra<strong>in</strong>storm <strong>the</strong><br />

project progress.<br />

Selection <strong>of</strong> team members<br />

The study <strong>in</strong>vestigated how team members were selected to jo<strong>in</strong> specific projects. When asked how team members<br />

were picked, 65% <strong>of</strong> respondents answered that <strong>the</strong>y were picked because <strong>the</strong>y worked <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> section <strong>in</strong> which<br />

<strong>the</strong> project was be<strong>in</strong>g implemented. Team players were also highly regarded <strong>in</strong> pick<strong>in</strong>g team members. This was<br />

evident from <strong>the</strong> response to <strong>the</strong> question regard<strong>in</strong>g whe<strong>the</strong>r team play was a consideration <strong>in</strong> terms <strong>of</strong> who was<br />

picked for <strong>in</strong>clusion <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> team: 50 respondents (47.6%) <strong>in</strong>dicated <strong>the</strong>y agreed, while 19 o<strong>the</strong>rs (18%) <strong>in</strong>dicated<br />

<strong>the</strong>y strongly agreed.<br />

In some <strong>in</strong>stitutions formal appo<strong>in</strong>tments were made through <strong>in</strong>vitation letters, while <strong>in</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r <strong>in</strong>stitutions <strong>the</strong><br />

selection was totally <strong>in</strong>formal. For example, when team members were asked through a questionnaire if <strong>the</strong>y<br />

received an <strong>in</strong>vitation letter to jo<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> team, 26% responded that <strong>the</strong>y did not get an <strong>in</strong>vitation letter. Ano<strong>the</strong>r<br />

13% were not sure, but 55% ei<strong>the</strong>r agreed (30%) or strongly agreed (25%). In a follow-up <strong>in</strong>terview, it was revealed<br />

that at some <strong>in</strong>stitutions members were picked from <strong>the</strong> department based on <strong>the</strong>ir competence, but that this was<br />

done <strong>in</strong>formally. One <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> team members from a participat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>stitution expla<strong>in</strong>ed as follows:<br />

…<strong>the</strong>re was no letter; it was a sort <strong>of</strong> a ‘gentlemen’s understand<strong>in</strong>g’. The HoD told me that I was nom<strong>in</strong>ated and<br />

<strong>the</strong> team leader <strong>in</strong>formed me that it is about <strong>the</strong> one <strong>of</strong> science and technology…It was a matter <strong>of</strong> call<strong>in</strong>g me on<br />

<strong>the</strong> phone and tell<strong>in</strong>g me that I was also a member <strong>of</strong> that group.<br />

Similar comments were received from <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r <strong>in</strong>stitutions. When asked if <strong>the</strong>y had jo<strong>in</strong>ed <strong>the</strong> project because<br />

<strong>the</strong>y were orig<strong>in</strong>ators <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> idea, only 25% ei<strong>the</strong>r agreed or strongly agreed, with a large number (60%) ei<strong>the</strong>r<br />

strongly disagree<strong>in</strong>g or disagree<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

Closeness between <strong>in</strong>stitutional project coord<strong>in</strong>ators, team leaders and team members<br />

The f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs from <strong>in</strong>terviews revealed that <strong>the</strong>re was a close relationship between <strong>the</strong> project coord<strong>in</strong>ators, team<br />

leaders and team members. In four <strong>in</strong>stitutions, which had a total <strong>of</strong> eleven projects (42%), <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional<br />

coord<strong>in</strong>ators appo<strong>in</strong>ted both team leaders and project team members; while <strong>in</strong> one <strong>in</strong>stitution, <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional<br />

coord<strong>in</strong>ator, <strong>the</strong> team leaders and <strong>the</strong> team members were appo<strong>in</strong>ted by university management. Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore,<br />

<strong>in</strong> three projects (11.5%), <strong>the</strong> team leaders, <strong>in</strong> consultation with <strong>in</strong>stitutional coord<strong>in</strong>ators, appo<strong>in</strong>ted <strong>the</strong> team<br />

24<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


Determ<strong>in</strong>ants <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Successful Diffusion <strong>of</strong> Technology Innovations <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong><br />

<strong>Education</strong> Institutions <strong>in</strong> Africa: A social network approach<br />

members. At <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan, for example, dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> focus group discussions, eight out <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> ten<br />

respondents <strong>in</strong>dicated that <strong>the</strong>y were ei<strong>the</strong>r former students <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> team leaders and/or project coord<strong>in</strong>ators or<br />

<strong>the</strong>y worked <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> same department. At Kenyatta University, all <strong>the</strong> team members <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> onl<strong>in</strong>e executive MBA<br />

project were logically drawn from <strong>the</strong> same school under <strong>the</strong> dean. This meant that <strong>the</strong> dean wielded <strong>the</strong> power,<br />

and that power association moved <strong>the</strong> team. In <strong>the</strong> project focus<strong>in</strong>g on digitization <strong>of</strong> past exam<strong>in</strong>ation papers, <strong>the</strong><br />

deputy librarian was a team member and this also meant that implementers knew <strong>the</strong>y were work<strong>in</strong>g with <strong>the</strong>ir<br />

boss. In all <strong>the</strong> projects at <strong>the</strong> Catholic University <strong>of</strong> Mozambique, <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional coord<strong>in</strong>ator and <strong>the</strong> team leader<br />

were <strong>the</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> director and Distance <strong>Education</strong> director respectively. The team members were drawn from <strong>the</strong>ir<br />

sections. This was also <strong>the</strong> case for all projects at <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> Dar es Salaam: <strong>the</strong> team members were drawn<br />

from <strong>the</strong> Centre for Virtual Learn<strong>in</strong>g (CVL), or from <strong>the</strong> Department <strong>of</strong> Computer Science and Eng<strong>in</strong>eer<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

Team members’ perceptions <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional project coord<strong>in</strong>ators and/or project leaders<br />

When <strong>the</strong> respondents were asked to describe <strong>the</strong>ir team leaders, 71% believed <strong>the</strong>ir leaders were focused, and 53%<br />

believed <strong>the</strong>y were <strong>in</strong>spir<strong>in</strong>g, with only 2% and 4% <strong>in</strong>dicat<strong>in</strong>g that <strong>the</strong>ir leaders tended to be <strong>in</strong>active, and too<br />

busy to engage <strong>in</strong> project activities. When asked if team leaders’ knowledge contributed to project success, 78% <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> respondents ei<strong>the</strong>r agreed or strongly agreed, while only 8% disagreed and none strongly disagreed. The same<br />

responses were replicated when respondents were asked if team members’ knowledge <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> facilitated success.<br />

This was fur<strong>the</strong>r backed up by <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>terviews. For example, when asked if <strong>the</strong> project leaders and <strong>in</strong>stitutional<br />

coord<strong>in</strong>ators contributed towards <strong>the</strong> success <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> project, one respondent said: ‘To me project coord<strong>in</strong>ators<br />

played a greater role <strong>in</strong> project success because <strong>the</strong>y are <strong>the</strong> ones who <strong>in</strong>itiated <strong>the</strong> various tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>terventions<br />

for us. They even struggled for us to tra<strong>in</strong> outside <strong>the</strong> country.’<br />

Similarly, one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> respondents from ano<strong>the</strong>r <strong>in</strong>stitution said:<br />

[The] team leader will have all it takes to encourage his followers or members <strong>of</strong> his team, even when certa<strong>in</strong><br />

expectations are not met. If we ask what it takes to lead we always have that k<strong>in</strong>d <strong>of</strong> a word <strong>the</strong>y need at any<br />

po<strong>in</strong>t <strong>in</strong> time to keep <strong>the</strong>m mov<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

Motivation and fidelity <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional project coord<strong>in</strong>ators and team leaders<br />

In some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> projects, <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional coord<strong>in</strong>ators and team leaders lacked fidelity especially on report<strong>in</strong>g<br />

project outputs as well as project success. This f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g became evident <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> qualitative data. Lack <strong>of</strong> fidelity was<br />

evident <strong>in</strong> four (15%) <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> 26 projects. In one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> projects, content was meant to be animated but <strong>the</strong> team<br />

leader went for add<strong>in</strong>g graphics. A respondent from one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutions evidently illustrated that:<br />

No, that was <strong>the</strong> first phase; <strong>the</strong> next phase had materials so <strong>the</strong>y were to add graphics and animations. But let<br />

me be clear; <strong>the</strong>y did not add animations to all twelve. I th<strong>in</strong>k <strong>the</strong>y picked a few [laughs] and added graphics.<br />

In ano<strong>the</strong>r project <strong>the</strong> team leader agreed <strong>the</strong>re was lack <strong>of</strong> fidelity:<br />

Yes, and apart from that it had its limitations: number one, unless it is archived students cannot go back to that<br />

same session. Once <strong>the</strong> sessions [is] over, one hour, two hours, that’s it? […] so I sat <strong>the</strong>m down as <strong>the</strong> director,<br />

I sold this idea to <strong>the</strong>m; someth<strong>in</strong>g came up so suddenly <strong>the</strong>n I carried <strong>the</strong>m along under this new proposal, <strong>the</strong><br />

revised proposal is that we will simulate a class <strong>in</strong>stead <strong>of</strong> hav<strong>in</strong>g radio and TV sessions as <strong>in</strong>itially proposed.<br />

There was a noted lack <strong>of</strong> voluntar<strong>in</strong>ess from project leaders. A case <strong>of</strong> leaders who came <strong>in</strong> simply <strong>in</strong> order to<br />

‘comply’ can be seen from <strong>the</strong> follow<strong>in</strong>g explanation by one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> respondents:<br />

But like I mentioned to you <strong>in</strong> an earlier chat, leaders <strong>of</strong> some projects were imposed on <strong>the</strong> project. They had no<br />

<strong>in</strong>terest, no motivation and <strong>the</strong>refore acted for a while as a h<strong>in</strong>drance to project progress ra<strong>the</strong>r than as facilitators.<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

25


Determ<strong>in</strong>ants <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Successful Diffusion <strong>of</strong> Technology Innovations <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong><br />

<strong>Education</strong> Institutions <strong>in</strong> Africa: A social network approach<br />

Additionally, <strong>in</strong> some projects, it was evident that <strong>the</strong> lack <strong>of</strong> proper networks <strong>in</strong>hibited project implementation.<br />

This was where <strong>in</strong>stitutional project coord<strong>in</strong>ators and/or team leaders treated <strong>the</strong>ir projects as ‘islands’ <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>novation<br />

<strong>in</strong>stead <strong>of</strong> work<strong>in</strong>g with o<strong>the</strong>r staff members <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir departments. From <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>terviews, it was evident that<br />

four projects were affected by <strong>the</strong> existence <strong>of</strong> a silo mentality. Some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> departments were reluctant to share<br />

technology knowledge, while <strong>in</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r cases <strong>the</strong>re were <strong>in</strong>dividuals who did not want to share. Fragmented adoption<br />

rema<strong>in</strong>ed a challenge and ‘pockets <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>novation’ are risky and do not become stable for acceptability by o<strong>the</strong>r<br />

departments.<br />

DISCUSSION<br />

The study <strong>in</strong>vestigated how <strong>the</strong> position <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional coord<strong>in</strong>ators and project leaders <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir <strong>in</strong>stitutional<br />

social networks contributed to <strong>the</strong> success or failure <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> technology <strong>in</strong>novation projects implemented across<br />

<strong>the</strong> seven African higher education <strong>in</strong>stitutions. The study found that project coord<strong>in</strong>ators and project leaders<br />

were at <strong>the</strong> centre <strong>of</strong> communication <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> implementation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>novations <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir <strong>in</strong>stitutions. The f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> study are consistent with those <strong>of</strong> Hamre and Vidgen (2008), who found that <strong>in</strong>dividuals at <strong>the</strong> centre <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> social network <strong>in</strong>fluenced <strong>the</strong> diffusion <strong>of</strong> f<strong>in</strong>ance management system implementation <strong>in</strong> a higher education<br />

organization.<br />

The study also found that <strong>in</strong>stitutional project coord<strong>in</strong>ators and team leaders played a significant contribut<strong>in</strong>g<br />

role <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> success <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> projects, especially those that met <strong>the</strong>ir targets. In <strong>the</strong>se projects, <strong>in</strong>stitutional project<br />

coord<strong>in</strong>ators were active, dedicated, and <strong>in</strong>volved <strong>in</strong> almost all <strong>the</strong> implementation activities such as plann<strong>in</strong>g,<br />

promotion, tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g, resource allocation and technology pilot test<strong>in</strong>g. These f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs corroborate those <strong>of</strong> Hamre<br />

and Vidgen (2008), and those <strong>of</strong> Mirriahi et al. (2012), already mentioned.<br />

However, Landherr et al. (2010) argue that one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> ma<strong>in</strong> challenges fac<strong>in</strong>g diffusion <strong>of</strong> technology <strong>in</strong>novation<br />

is how to identify key persons (op<strong>in</strong>ion leaders) <strong>in</strong> a social network dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> technology <strong>in</strong>novation diffusion<br />

process. In <strong>the</strong> <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI projects, <strong>the</strong> current study found that two methods were used. Firstly, those who <strong>in</strong>itiated<br />

<strong>the</strong> project ideas automatically became coord<strong>in</strong>ators and/or team leaders. These <strong>in</strong>dividuals were knowledgeable<br />

with regard to <strong>the</strong> doma<strong>in</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> technology <strong>in</strong>novation to be implemented and <strong>the</strong>refore contributed towards its<br />

success. Accord<strong>in</strong>g to Valente and Davis (1999), leaders with sufficient knowledge <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> technology <strong>in</strong>novations<br />

are important as <strong>the</strong>y are aware <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> types <strong>of</strong> technology <strong>in</strong>novation likely to succeed and how <strong>the</strong>y should be<br />

implemented.<br />

Secondly, <strong>in</strong> some <strong>in</strong>stitutions, <strong>in</strong>stitutional project coord<strong>in</strong>ators and team leaders were appo<strong>in</strong>ted by <strong>the</strong> top<br />

university management from with<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> implement<strong>in</strong>g unit; <strong>the</strong>refore, <strong>the</strong>re was a political connection and trust<br />

between <strong>the</strong> project coord<strong>in</strong>ators and/or team leaders and top management. The <strong>in</strong>volvement <strong>of</strong> top management<br />

<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI projects had a significant positive impact on <strong>the</strong> success <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> technology <strong>in</strong>novations (Spaven,<br />

2013). Top management could <strong>of</strong>fer a range <strong>of</strong> support services such as additional fund<strong>in</strong>g support, technological<br />

support, and experience support, which contributes to <strong>the</strong> success <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> technology <strong>in</strong>novation beyond project<br />

implementation (L<strong>in</strong>, Ma & L<strong>in</strong>, 2011).<br />

Institutions that were not able to identify key persons with qualities <strong>of</strong> op<strong>in</strong>ion leaders experienced a number <strong>of</strong><br />

challenges dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> technology <strong>in</strong>novation diffusion. This was argued by Spaven (2013), who claims that some<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI projects did not have available key personnel to facilitate <strong>the</strong> implementation and diffusion <strong>of</strong><br />

technology <strong>in</strong>novation <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir <strong>in</strong>stitutions. In <strong>the</strong> majority <strong>of</strong> those projects, <strong>in</strong>stitutional coord<strong>in</strong>ators and/or<br />

team leaders were not active and could not share technology <strong>in</strong>novation <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional social network. This<br />

f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g was fur<strong>the</strong>r backed up by <strong>the</strong> quantitative data, when respondents were asked to rate <strong>the</strong> commitment <strong>of</strong><br />

26<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


Determ<strong>in</strong>ants <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Successful Diffusion <strong>of</strong> Technology Innovations <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong><br />

<strong>Education</strong> Institutions <strong>in</strong> Africa: A social network approach<br />

coord<strong>in</strong>ators and project leaders. It was found that 6% answered that <strong>the</strong>ir <strong>in</strong>stitutional project coord<strong>in</strong>ators and/<br />

or team leaders were ei<strong>the</strong>r ‘laid back’ (2%) or too busy for <strong>the</strong> project (4%). It is likely that such coord<strong>in</strong>ators/<br />

leaders were not aware <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> needs <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> project or were not knowledgeable about <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>novation <strong>the</strong>y were<br />

implement<strong>in</strong>g (Valente & Davis, 1999).<br />

In addition to project coord<strong>in</strong>ators and team leaders, <strong>the</strong> selection <strong>of</strong> team members was a key factor <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> success<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> majority <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI projects. Spaven (2013) describes <strong>the</strong> project teams and team members as <strong>the</strong><br />

‘build<strong>in</strong>g blocks’ <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI project implementation. The current study revealed that almost two-thirds<br />

(65%) <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> team members were selected by <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional project coord<strong>in</strong>ators and/or project leaders, and<br />

that <strong>the</strong> majority <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>m came from <strong>the</strong> project implement<strong>in</strong>g unit <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitution. As a result, most <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>m<br />

trusted <strong>the</strong>ir leaders, and had positive perceptions <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> technology <strong>in</strong>novations coord<strong>in</strong>ated by <strong>the</strong>ir project<br />

coord<strong>in</strong>ators. Accord<strong>in</strong>g to Rogers (2003), such perceptions are a critical factor <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> adoption decision process.<br />

The perceptions <strong>of</strong> team members <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir coord<strong>in</strong>ators and team leaders were evidenced by <strong>the</strong> responses <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

team members when asked to rate <strong>the</strong> performance <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir leaders dur<strong>in</strong>g technology <strong>in</strong>novation implementation.<br />

The majority <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> team members concurred that <strong>the</strong>ir team leaders ei<strong>the</strong>r provided an <strong>in</strong>spiration or were quite<br />

focused on results (with 71% <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> respondents answer<strong>in</strong>g that team leaders were focused and 54% answer<strong>in</strong>g<br />

that <strong>the</strong>y provided <strong>in</strong>spiration).<br />

CONCLUSION<br />

This case study <strong>in</strong>vestigated <strong>the</strong> role <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional project coord<strong>in</strong>ators and/or team leaders <strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional social<br />

networks <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> success <strong>of</strong> <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI projects implemented <strong>in</strong> seven higher education <strong>in</strong>stitutions <strong>in</strong> Africa.<br />

Generally, it was found that <strong>the</strong> projects that were successful and managed to meet all <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>tended projects<br />

outputs were those <strong>in</strong> which <strong>in</strong>stitutional coord<strong>in</strong>ators acted as op<strong>in</strong>ion leaders dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> technology <strong>in</strong>novation<br />

process. On <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r hand, <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> case <strong>of</strong> most <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> projects that did not achieve all <strong>the</strong>ir <strong>in</strong>tended outcomes<br />

– and could thus be termed partial failures – <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional coord<strong>in</strong>ators did not harness <strong>the</strong> resources <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

social network system as op<strong>in</strong>ion leaders. The current f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs add substantially to our understand<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> role<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional coord<strong>in</strong>ators and/or team leaders <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> diffusion <strong>of</strong> educational technology <strong>in</strong>novation <strong>in</strong> higher<br />

education specifically <strong>in</strong> Africa.<br />

REFERENCES<br />

Abrahamson, E. & Rosenkopf, L. (1997). Social network effects on <strong>the</strong> extent <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>novation diffusion: A computer<br />

simulation. Organization Science, 8(3), 289–309. doi:10.1287/orsc.8.3.289<br />

Farrell, G. & Isaacs, S. (2007). Survey <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> and education <strong>in</strong> Africa: A summary report, based on 53 country surveys.<br />

Wash<strong>in</strong>gton, DC. Retrieved 15 December 2013 from www.<strong>in</strong>fodev.org/en/Publication.353.html<br />

Freeman, L. C. (1978). Centrality <strong>in</strong> social networks conceptual clarification. Social Networks, 1, 215–239.<br />

Retrieved 15 December 2013 from http://moreno.ss.uci.edu/27.pdf<br />

Hamre, L. & Vidgen, R. (2008). Us<strong>in</strong>g social networks and communities <strong>of</strong> practice to support <strong>in</strong>formation<br />

systems implementation. 16th European Conference on Information Systems, ECIS. Retrieved 15 December 2013<br />

from http://is2.lse.ac.uk/asp/aspecis/20080177.pdf<br />

Heeks, R. (2002). Information systems and develop<strong>in</strong>g countries: Failure, success, and local improvisations. The<br />

Information Society, 18(2), 101–112. doi:10.1080/01972240290075039<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

27


Determ<strong>in</strong>ants <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Successful Diffusion <strong>of</strong> Technology Innovations <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong><br />

<strong>Education</strong> Institutions <strong>in</strong> Africa: A social network approach<br />

Hoosen, S. & Butcher, N. (2012). <strong>ICT</strong> development at African universities: The experience <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>PHEA</strong><br />

<strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiative. e/Merge 2012. Retrieved 15 December 2013 from http://emerge2012.net/<br />

proceed<strong>in</strong>gs/<br />

Ika, L. A., Diallo, A., & Thuillier, D. (2012). Critical success factors for World Bank projects: An empirical<br />

<strong>in</strong>vestigation. International Journal <strong>of</strong> Project Management, 30(1), 105–116. doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2011.03.005<br />

Landherr, A., Friedl, B., & Heidemann, J. (2010). A critical review <strong>of</strong> centrality measures <strong>in</strong> social networks.<br />

Bus<strong>in</strong>ess & Information Systems Eng<strong>in</strong>eer<strong>in</strong>g, 2(6), 371–385.<br />

Li, Y., Ma, S., Zhang, Y., & Huang, R. (2013). An improved mix framework for op<strong>in</strong>ion leader identification <strong>in</strong><br />

onl<strong>in</strong>e learn<strong>in</strong>g communities. Knowledge-Based Systems, 43, 43–51. doi:10.1016/j.knosys.2013.01.005<br />

L<strong>in</strong>, C., Ma, Z., & L<strong>in</strong>, R. C.-P. (2011). Re-exam<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> critical success factors <strong>of</strong> e-learn<strong>in</strong>g from <strong>the</strong> EU<br />

perspective. International Journal <strong>of</strong> Management <strong>in</strong> <strong>Education</strong>, 5(1), 44–62. doi:10.1504/IJMIE.2011.037754<br />

L<strong>in</strong>na, P. (2013). Experiences <strong>of</strong> design<strong>in</strong>g an e-learn<strong>in</strong>g tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g program <strong>in</strong> a collaborative way. Paper delivered<br />

at <strong>the</strong> IST-Africa 2013 Conference and Exhibition, Kampala, Uganda.<br />

Mirriahi, N., Dawson, S., & Hoven, D. (2012). Identify<strong>in</strong>g key actors for technology adoption <strong>in</strong> higher education:<br />

A social network approach. In Australian Society for Computers <strong>in</strong> Learn<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> Tertiary <strong>Education</strong> Annual Conference<br />

2012, Well<strong>in</strong>gton, New Zealand. Accessed 15 December 2013 from www.ascilite2012.org/images/custom/<br />

mirriahi,_neg<strong>in</strong>_-_identify<strong>in</strong>g_key.pdf<br />

Peansupap, V. & Walker, D. H. T. (2005). Factors enabl<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>formation and communication technology<br />

diffusion and actual implementation <strong>in</strong> construction organisations. Electronic Journal <strong>of</strong> Information Technology <strong>in</strong><br />

Construction, 10, 193–218. Accessed 15 December 2013 from www.itcon.org/2005/14. Accessed 15 December<br />

2013.<br />

Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>novations. The Free Press, New York.<br />

Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>novations (5th Ed.). The Free Press, New York.<br />

Spaven, P. (2013). <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI summative evaluation report. Executive summary. Report on <strong>the</strong> <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI<br />

prepared for <strong>the</strong> South African Institute for Distance <strong>Education</strong>.<br />

Unw<strong>in</strong>, T., Kleessen, B., Hollow, D., Williams, J., Oloo, L. M., Alwala, J., & Muianga, X. (2010). Digital learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />

management systems <strong>in</strong> Africa: Myths and realities. Open Learn<strong>in</strong>g: The Journal <strong>of</strong> Open and Distance Learn<strong>in</strong>g,<br />

25(1), 5–23. doi:10.1080/02680510903482033<br />

Valente, T. W. & Davis, R. L. (1999). Accelerat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> diffusion <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>novations us<strong>in</strong>g op<strong>in</strong>ion leaders. The ANNALS<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> American Academy <strong>of</strong> Political and Social Science, 566(1), 55–67. doi:10.1177/0002716299566001005<br />

Weenen, T. C., Pronker, E. S., Commandeur, H. R., & Claassen, E. (2013). Barriers to <strong>in</strong>novation <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> medical<br />

nutrition <strong>in</strong>dustry: A quantitative key op<strong>in</strong>ion leader analysis. PharmaNutrition, 1(3), 79–85. doi:10.1016/j.<br />

phanu.2013.04.001<br />

Zimmerman, D. & Yohon, T. (2004). Reth<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>formation technology transfer <strong>in</strong> higher education teach<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

In Pr<strong>of</strong>essional Communication Conference, 2004 (271–274).<br />

28<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


Determ<strong>in</strong>ants <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Successful Diffusion <strong>of</strong> Technology Innovations <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong><br />

<strong>Education</strong> Institutions <strong>in</strong> Africa: A social network approach<br />

NOTES:<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

29


An Investigation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Deployment <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Moodle Virtual Learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Environment at Eight African Universities<br />

An Investigation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Deployment <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

Moodle Virtual Learn<strong>in</strong>g Environment at<br />

Eight African Universities<br />

Brenda Mall<strong>in</strong>son<br />

Saide; Rhodes University, South Africa<br />

brendam@saide.org.za; B.Mall<strong>in</strong>son@ru.ac.za<br />

Greig Krull<br />

Saide<br />

greigk@saide.org.za<br />

ABSTRACT<br />

The deployment <strong>of</strong> educational technology to support teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g at universities can take many<br />

forms. Critically, one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> major components for <strong>the</strong> delivery <strong>of</strong> onl<strong>in</strong>e courses is <strong>the</strong> setup and management<br />

<strong>of</strong> a virtual learn<strong>in</strong>g environment (VLE). This case study considers VLE implementation challenges from a<br />

technological perspective and <strong>in</strong>vestigates <strong>the</strong> VLE deployment with<strong>in</strong> eight sub-Saharan African universities.<br />

Each university adopted or migrated to <strong>the</strong> open source Moodle VLE. The associated strengths and weaknesses<br />

<strong>of</strong> implementation <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> participat<strong>in</strong>g universities are exam<strong>in</strong>ed. F<strong>in</strong>ally, <strong>the</strong> lessons learned are collated <strong>in</strong>to<br />

a set <strong>of</strong> guidel<strong>in</strong>es for VLE implementation and ma<strong>in</strong>tenance processes for successful implementation with<strong>in</strong><br />

this context.<br />

Keywords: Moodle, virtual learn<strong>in</strong>g environment, educational technology, e-learn<strong>in</strong>g implementation,<br />

distance education, Partnership for <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong> <strong>in</strong> Africa (<strong>PHEA</strong>) <strong>Education</strong>al Technology<br />

Initiative (ETI)<br />

INTRODUCTION<br />

Us<strong>in</strong>g technology <strong>in</strong> support <strong>of</strong> teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g is <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>gly a priority for higher education <strong>in</strong>stitutions<br />

<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir efforts to engage learners <strong>in</strong> mean<strong>in</strong>gful educational experiences. EDUCAUSE (2003) reports that this<br />

commitment is driven by many factors, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> widely prevalent strategic vision <strong>of</strong> enhanc<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> teach<strong>in</strong>g<br />

and learn<strong>in</strong>g environment and respond<strong>in</strong>g to chang<strong>in</strong>g faculty and student needs for <strong>in</strong>creased flexibility with<br />

respect to time, place and mode <strong>of</strong> course delivery.<br />

While <strong>the</strong> deployment <strong>of</strong> educational technology <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> higher education sector <strong>in</strong> Africa can be perceived<br />

as a solution to some challenges, it raises additional issues such as cop<strong>in</strong>g with unreliable power supply,<br />

limited Internet access, pedagogical considerations, and <strong>the</strong> need for sufficient local expertise to support<br />

such deployment. A key consideration is <strong>the</strong> technical <strong>in</strong>frastructure and environment enabl<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> technology for teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g. This case study explores <strong>the</strong> technological challenges <strong>in</strong>volved <strong>in</strong><br />

deploy<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> Moodle virtual learn<strong>in</strong>g environment (VLE) at higher education <strong>in</strong>stitutions <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> sub-Saharan<br />

African context and provides some recommendations for overcom<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>se challenges.<br />

30<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


An Investigation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Deployment <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Moodle Virtual Learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Environment at Eight African Universities<br />

BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY<br />

As expla<strong>in</strong>ed <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>troduction to <strong>the</strong>se case studies, each <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> seven participat<strong>in</strong>g sub-Saharan African<br />

universities conceptualised and developed its own projects, result<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> 26 dist<strong>in</strong>ct projects <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> four-year<br />

<strong>in</strong>itiative. Of <strong>the</strong>se 26 projects, eleven <strong>in</strong>dividual projects <strong>in</strong>volved <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> a VLE, for mount<strong>in</strong>g over 140<br />

onl<strong>in</strong>e courses as project deliverables. Ensur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> successful implementation and ma<strong>in</strong>tenance <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> VLE<br />

at each <strong>in</strong>stitution was <strong>the</strong>refore a crucial component <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> overall programme. It should be noted that <strong>the</strong><br />

participat<strong>in</strong>g higher education <strong>in</strong>stitutions were largely on-campus <strong>in</strong>stitutions that were plann<strong>in</strong>g to adopt<br />

a blended approach to us<strong>in</strong>g technology to support <strong>the</strong>ir teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g activities. In this respect <strong>the</strong><br />

environment could be considered low-risk <strong>in</strong> that <strong>the</strong>re were elements <strong>of</strong> scheduled face-to-face <strong>in</strong>struction<br />

and communication that were to take place concurrently with <strong>the</strong> onl<strong>in</strong>e <strong>in</strong>teractions with<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> VLE.<br />

In addition to <strong>the</strong> seven universities participat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI, 1 <strong>the</strong> Open University <strong>of</strong> Tanzania (OUT)<br />

was <strong>in</strong>cluded <strong>in</strong> this Moodle survey because although OUT was not part <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI, <strong>the</strong>re was an ongo<strong>in</strong>g<br />

concurrent relationship with <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitution, and it is geographically close to one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> participat<strong>in</strong>g universities.<br />

SELECTION AND USE OF A VLE<br />

A comprehensive VLE is an important means for deliver<strong>in</strong>g distance learn<strong>in</strong>g, but is also crucial <strong>in</strong> a blended<br />

learn<strong>in</strong>g situation, allow<strong>in</strong>g students to access a range <strong>of</strong> electronic resources to supplement traditional faceto-face<br />

teach<strong>in</strong>g (Unw<strong>in</strong> et al., 2010: 5). A VLE or learn<strong>in</strong>g management system (LMS) is used to house and<br />

deliver learn<strong>in</strong>g content, and facilitate and add value to <strong>the</strong> teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g process. A VLE can be<br />

viewed as an <strong>in</strong>tegrated distributed learn<strong>in</strong>g environment and a good start<strong>in</strong>g framework <strong>in</strong> develop<strong>in</strong>g country<br />

contexts where higher education <strong>in</strong>stitutions wish to embark on <strong>the</strong> deployment <strong>of</strong> support<strong>in</strong>g technologies.<br />

The notion <strong>of</strong> a s<strong>in</strong>gle-user sign-on to a s<strong>in</strong>gle s<strong>of</strong>tware application, with<strong>in</strong> a relatively simple and safe learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />

environment, engenders confidence for new users – be <strong>the</strong>y lecturers or students. Typical features <strong>of</strong> a VLE<br />

<strong>in</strong>clude (Sife, Lwoga & Sanga, 2007: 59):<br />

• Learn<strong>in</strong>g activity types (<strong>in</strong>dividual and collaborative) <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g forums, quizzes, assignments, and wikis;<br />

• Communication tools <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g journals and <strong>in</strong>stant messag<strong>in</strong>g;<br />

• Access to resources <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g embedded web pages, <strong>in</strong>ternal uploaded and l<strong>in</strong>ked files, and external l<strong>in</strong>ks<br />

to websites; and<br />

• Adm<strong>in</strong>istration tools <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g user au<strong>the</strong>ntication, grad<strong>in</strong>g and student enrolment.<br />

There are many different VLEs available on <strong>the</strong> market. There are proprietary solutions such as Blackboard as<br />

well as open source solutions such as Moodle and Sakai (Unw<strong>in</strong> et al., 2010; Sife et al., 2007). In <strong>the</strong> current<br />

study all eight participat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>stitutions elected to ei<strong>the</strong>r adopt or migrate to <strong>the</strong> Moodle VLE. Moodle is a free,<br />

open source e-learn<strong>in</strong>g platform available under <strong>the</strong> GNU Public Licence, and has a vibrant user and developer<br />

onl<strong>in</strong>e community at Moodle.org. The Moodle.org community is a network <strong>of</strong> over a million registered users,<br />

who <strong>in</strong>teract through <strong>the</strong> community website to share ideas, code, <strong>in</strong>formation and free support. At <strong>the</strong> time<br />

<strong>of</strong> this <strong>in</strong>vestigation, <strong>the</strong>re were 66,617 active sites registered on Moodle.org from 215 countries. The numbers<br />

<strong>of</strong> registered Moodle sites listed from <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI participat<strong>in</strong>g countries were: Uganda: 11, Nigeria: 55, Ghana:<br />

24, Mozambique: 12, Tanzania: 20 and Kenya: 80 (Moodle, 2012a).<br />

There were a number <strong>of</strong> reasons for select<strong>in</strong>g Moodle, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g that <strong>the</strong> system is open source (no licence<br />

cost) <strong>in</strong> nature and very well supported (Twaakyondo & Munaku, 2012: 34). Studies on factors affect<strong>in</strong>g<br />

1 Kenyatta University (Kenya), University <strong>of</strong> Dar es Salaam (Tanzania), University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan (Nigeria), University <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong> W<strong>in</strong>neba<br />

(Ghana), University <strong>of</strong> Jos (Nigeria), Catholic University <strong>of</strong> Mozambique (Universidade Católica de Moçambique) and Makerere University<br />

(Uganda).<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

31


An Investigation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Deployment <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Moodle Virtual Learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Environment at Eight African Universities<br />

acceptance and use <strong>of</strong> Moodle <strong>in</strong>clude that undertaken by Sumak, Hericko, Pusnik and Polancic (2011), whose<br />

analysis revealed that <strong>the</strong> actual use <strong>of</strong> Moodle depends on <strong>the</strong> behavioural <strong>in</strong>tention and attitudes towards<br />

us<strong>in</strong>g Moodle, and that perceived ease <strong>of</strong> use has a significant impact on perceived usefulness. In an evaluative<br />

comparison study us<strong>in</strong>g weighted criteria represent<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> needs <strong>of</strong> Canada’s Athabasca University, Stewart et<br />

al. (2007) reported that Moodle was a clear choice for <strong>the</strong>m, achiev<strong>in</strong>g 58 (<strong>of</strong> 71) first-place preferences <strong>in</strong> terms<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>dividual criteria among <strong>the</strong> three VLEs evaluated. In <strong>the</strong> current case study, <strong>in</strong> order to ensure support for<br />

<strong>the</strong> implementation, ma<strong>in</strong>tenance and end use <strong>of</strong> this system at each participat<strong>in</strong>g higher education <strong>in</strong>stitution,<br />

it was essential to identify and <strong>in</strong>vestigate technological challenges associated with VLE implementation, so<br />

that such challenges might be addressed.<br />

BARRIERS TO SUCCESSFUL VLE IMPLEMENTATION<br />

Marquard’s (2013) <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Stack provides a structured approach with<strong>in</strong> which to exam<strong>in</strong>e a<br />

number <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional educational technology elements and <strong>the</strong>ir associated considerations. Suggested layers<br />

to be considered start from policies and strategies and take cognisance <strong>of</strong> many <strong>in</strong>terl<strong>in</strong>ked factors, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g<br />

programme, curriculum and learn<strong>in</strong>g design, academic staff pr<strong>of</strong>essional development, <strong>the</strong> literacies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

target learners and <strong>the</strong>ir access to <strong>the</strong> course, student support, and appropriate <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong>frastructure, as well<br />

as referenc<strong>in</strong>g exist<strong>in</strong>g s<strong>of</strong>tware platforms and modus operandi at <strong>the</strong> higher education <strong>in</strong>stitution. In <strong>the</strong><br />

literature, some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se layers were identified as potential challenges to successful technical deployment.<br />

Lack <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional policies<br />

Sife et al. (2007) identify failure to take a systemic approach to <strong>in</strong>formation and communication technology<br />

(<strong>ICT</strong>) implementation as a major challenge to successful implementation, and advocate an <strong>in</strong>stitutional <strong>ICT</strong><br />

policy and an <strong>in</strong>stitutional strategic plan for <strong>ICT</strong> project implementation. Unw<strong>in</strong> et al. (2010: 17) found that<br />

<strong>the</strong> absence <strong>of</strong> an e-learn<strong>in</strong>g policy <strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutions can be a major factor limit<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> VLE.<br />

Limited technological <strong>in</strong>frastructure<br />

Network <strong>in</strong>frastructure, Internet access and power supply: Unw<strong>in</strong> et al. (2010: 17) suggest that it is ‘primarily <strong>the</strong><br />

technical and <strong>in</strong>frastructural aspects’ <strong>of</strong> VLE deployment that are <strong>the</strong> ma<strong>in</strong> factors prevent<strong>in</strong>g wider roll out.<br />

Poor Internet access is acknowledged as a major limit<strong>in</strong>g factor <strong>in</strong> African VLE implementations (Ssekakubo,<br />

Suleman & Marsden, 2011: 234). Limited bandwidth and very high costs <strong>of</strong> Internet access cont<strong>in</strong>ue to <strong>in</strong>hibit<br />

<strong>the</strong> effective use <strong>of</strong> e-learn<strong>in</strong>g across Africa (Unw<strong>in</strong> et al., 2010: 19). Despite bandwidth and connectivity<br />

issues, with careful plann<strong>in</strong>g and allocation <strong>of</strong> scarce resources <strong>in</strong>stitutions can deploy effective digital learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />

environments. For example, a university may be able to build a sound <strong>in</strong>tranet that does not rely on external<br />

Internet access (Unw<strong>in</strong> et al., 2010). Consistent Internet bandwidth was identified as a considerable challenge<br />

at each <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> eight participat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>stitutions, while <strong>the</strong> local <strong>in</strong>tranets were found to be more stable. Thus each<br />

<strong>in</strong>stitution cont<strong>in</strong>ued or decided to host its own Moodle platform on campus. Unw<strong>in</strong> et al. (2010: 17) and Mtebe,<br />

Dachi and Raphael (2011: 292) identified a fur<strong>the</strong>r major factor limit<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> VLE: an unreliable<br />

supply <strong>of</strong> electricity, with <strong>in</strong>stitutions fac<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>termittent power cuts from a limited national electricity grid.<br />

Configuration <strong>of</strong> hardware and s<strong>of</strong>tware: Mtebe et al. (2011: 289) report that a major barrier to e-learn<strong>in</strong>g uptake<br />

is access to hardware and s<strong>of</strong>tware. Appropriate server configuration is critical <strong>in</strong> order to maximise <strong>the</strong><br />

affordances <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> chosen hardware and s<strong>of</strong>tware.<br />

Ineffective ma<strong>in</strong>tenance: For VLE implementations, ma<strong>in</strong>tenance and user support are crucial, be<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong><br />

mechanisms through which <strong>in</strong>efficiencies and o<strong>the</strong>r usability problems can be identified and addressed.<br />

However many <strong>in</strong>stitutions lack ma<strong>in</strong>tenance strategies (Ssekakubo et al., 2011: 235).<br />

32<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


An Investigation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Deployment <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Moodle Virtual Learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Environment at Eight African Universities<br />

Lack <strong>of</strong> technical support<br />

Universities require an <strong>ICT</strong> technical unit to <strong>of</strong>fer support to users. In many cases <strong>the</strong>se units are understaffed<br />

or staff are <strong>in</strong>sufficiently tra<strong>in</strong>ed to be able to deal with tasks at <strong>the</strong> level required (Ssekakubo et al., 2011: 235;<br />

Sife et al., 2007). Unw<strong>in</strong> et al. (2010: 20) found that levels <strong>of</strong> tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> VLE were generally very low<br />

at African universities. Staff may be unaware <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> full functionality <strong>of</strong> VLEs and do not have <strong>the</strong> practical<br />

experience to implement <strong>the</strong> functionality effectively.<br />

AIMS OF THE STUDY<br />

One <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> ma<strong>in</strong> activities with<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI <strong>in</strong>volved <strong>the</strong> design, development and deployment <strong>of</strong> onl<strong>in</strong>e<br />

courses. In order for <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>itiative to be susta<strong>in</strong>able, appropriate support<strong>in</strong>g technologies such as <strong>the</strong> VLE<br />

needed to be successfully implemented. Failure to correctly <strong>in</strong>stall and optimally ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> VLEs would<br />

potentially jeopardize achievement <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> project objectives. Thus <strong>the</strong> current study was formulated to evaluate<br />

<strong>the</strong> VLE deployments at each participat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>stitution, to ensure that <strong>the</strong> implementation challenges identified<br />

above could be addressed. The areas <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>vestigation for <strong>the</strong> study were identified from a comb<strong>in</strong>ation <strong>of</strong><br />

experience from previous VLE site deployments and a brief literature survey. At <strong>the</strong> time that <strong>the</strong> study was<br />

conceived <strong>the</strong>re was very little literature available on VLE usage <strong>in</strong> Africa (see Unw<strong>in</strong> et al., 2010; Sife et<br />

al., 2007) and even less regard<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> technical and <strong>in</strong>frastructural aspects <strong>of</strong> VLE deployment <strong>in</strong> African<br />

universities. It is hoped that <strong>the</strong> results <strong>of</strong> this study will add to this body <strong>of</strong> knowledge. The survey questions<br />

were also <strong>in</strong>formed by <strong>the</strong> ‘technological’ dimension <strong>of</strong> Khan’s e-Learn<strong>in</strong>g Framework (Khan, 2005). This<br />

dimension exam<strong>in</strong>es issues with<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> technology <strong>in</strong>frastructure, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>frastructure plann<strong>in</strong>g, technical<br />

capability, policy, hardware and s<strong>of</strong>tware.<br />

The aims <strong>of</strong> this study were to:<br />

• Collect and evaluate data concern<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> respective site deployments <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> VLEs;<br />

• Exam<strong>in</strong>e <strong>the</strong>se <strong>in</strong>stitutional VLE environments and <strong>in</strong>vestigate <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>dividual deployment characteristics<br />

with a view to eventual contextual optimisation;<br />

• Establish <strong>the</strong> associated strengths and weaknesses; and<br />

• Collate lessons learned <strong>in</strong>to a set <strong>of</strong> guidel<strong>in</strong>es relat<strong>in</strong>g to implementation and ma<strong>in</strong>tenance processes.<br />

DATA COLLECTION<br />

The <strong>in</strong>vestigation consisted <strong>of</strong> a short literature review, an analysis <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional policy documents, structured<br />

<strong>in</strong>terviews with relevant university staff, reviews <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> system <strong>in</strong>frastructure, and general site observations. A<br />

survey <strong>in</strong>strument for data ga<strong>the</strong>r<strong>in</strong>g was developed and comprised <strong>the</strong> follow<strong>in</strong>g sections:<br />

• Network Environment Policies and Infrastructure;<br />

• Hardware and S<strong>of</strong>tware Specifications and Configuration;<br />

• Moodle Site Policies;<br />

• Ma<strong>in</strong>tenance and Backup Processes; and<br />

• Technical Support.<br />

Data was collected through <strong>the</strong> follow<strong>in</strong>g process:<br />

• An <strong>in</strong>itial request was made to each <strong>in</strong>stitutional coord<strong>in</strong>ator to supply relevant <strong>in</strong>stitutional VLE policy<br />

documents. An analysis <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> received <strong>in</strong>stitutional policy documents was performed;<br />

• Arrangements were made for <strong>the</strong> project technical support partner (James Swash <strong>of</strong> Neil Butcher &<br />

Associates) to travel to each <strong>in</strong>stitution to conduct structured <strong>in</strong>terviews, review <strong>the</strong> system <strong>in</strong>frastructure,<br />

and make general site observations. The data was ga<strong>the</strong>red from <strong>the</strong> eight site visits (one visit to each higher<br />

education <strong>in</strong>stitution);<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

33


An Investigation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Deployment <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Moodle Virtual Learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Environment at Eight African Universities<br />

• Structured <strong>in</strong>terviews were set up with relevant staff at each university over <strong>the</strong> period September 2010 to<br />

October 2011. This <strong>in</strong>cluded <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI project coord<strong>in</strong>ators, <strong>in</strong>stitutional systems adm<strong>in</strong>istrators from<br />

Information Technology divisions, and Moodle server adm<strong>in</strong>istrators. Interviews were conducted with<br />

two to four employees with <strong>the</strong>se roles at each <strong>in</strong>stitution. Dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>se site visits, an attempt was made to<br />

obta<strong>in</strong> any miss<strong>in</strong>g policy documentation from <strong>the</strong> first request; and<br />

• After <strong>the</strong> site visits, fur<strong>the</strong>r <strong>in</strong>formation was ascerta<strong>in</strong>ed via follow-up e-mails.<br />

FINDINGS<br />

The results <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> data collection <strong>in</strong>dicated that experience at <strong>the</strong>se higher education <strong>in</strong>stitutions <strong>of</strong> us<strong>in</strong>g<br />

technology to support teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g varied considerably, with some <strong>in</strong>stitutions hav<strong>in</strong>g been early<br />

adopters and o<strong>the</strong>rs hav<strong>in</strong>g only recently thought <strong>of</strong> engag<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> e-learn<strong>in</strong>g practices. This led to a wide range<br />

<strong>in</strong> general status <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> various Moodle <strong>in</strong>stallations. One <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> opportunities presented by this variety was<br />

<strong>the</strong> possibility <strong>of</strong> be<strong>in</strong>g able to share <strong>the</strong> specific deployment successes and failures <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> early adopters with<br />

<strong>the</strong> more recent technology adopters, thus provid<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> potential for fast-track<strong>in</strong>g uptake.<br />

Although <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutions varied <strong>in</strong> terms <strong>of</strong> address<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> challenges associated with VLE implementation,<br />

a positive f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g was that each <strong>in</strong>stitution was us<strong>in</strong>g a Moodle server to mount a number <strong>of</strong> live courses and<br />

that each VLE was reliable <strong>in</strong> terms <strong>of</strong> user availability. The number <strong>of</strong> courses and users varied greatly between<br />

<strong>in</strong>stitutions, depend<strong>in</strong>g on <strong>the</strong>ir environment. Table 1 provides an overview <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> broad Moodle environment<br />

at each university.<br />

Table 1: Broad Moodle environment at <strong>the</strong> universities<br />

Aspect U1 U2 U3 U4 U5 U6 U7 U8<br />

Dedicated Moodle adm<strong>in</strong>istrator<br />

Established e-learn<strong>in</strong>g/virtual learn<strong>in</strong>g unit ü ü ü ü<br />

Regular staff tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g ü ü ü ü ü ü ü<br />

Regular student tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g ü ü ü ü ü ü ü<br />

Sufficient budget and skill sets ü ü<br />

Adequate network access for students ü ü ü ü ü<br />

VLE policy <strong>in</strong> place<br />

ü<br />

ü<br />

As expected, universities that had been <strong>the</strong> earliest adopters <strong>of</strong> a VLE were <strong>the</strong> most likely to have <strong>the</strong> optimal<br />

environments <strong>in</strong> place. Only one university (U1) was found to have a conducive environment for successful<br />

deployment that covered almost all aspects <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> evaluation. At <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r end <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> scale, <strong>the</strong> university with<br />

<strong>the</strong> most recent deployment <strong>of</strong> Moodle (U3) did not yet have any aspects <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> broad Moodle environment<br />

<strong>in</strong> place.<br />

The analysis <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs is presented below accord<strong>in</strong>g to <strong>the</strong> possible barriers to successful VLE<br />

implementation identified.<br />

34<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


An Investigation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Deployment <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Moodle Virtual Learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Environment at Eight African Universities<br />

Institutional policy<br />

Institutional policies are a useful basis for implementation, practice and procedure. Without <strong>in</strong>stitutional<br />

policies, decisions tend to occur on an ad hoc basis without proper plann<strong>in</strong>g. The participat<strong>in</strong>g higher education<br />

<strong>in</strong>stitutions were at different po<strong>in</strong>ts <strong>in</strong> develop<strong>in</strong>g policies related to <strong>the</strong>ir deployment <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Moodle VLE, with<br />

only one (U1) hav<strong>in</strong>g a comprehensive policy <strong>in</strong> place. It was found that a comprehensive VLE policy needed<br />

to provide guidance relat<strong>in</strong>g to both front- and back-end adm<strong>in</strong>istration, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g:<br />

• Adm<strong>in</strong>istrator roles and responsibilities;<br />

• User au<strong>the</strong>ntication;<br />

• Disaster recovery;<br />

• Upgrades and updates;<br />

• Course creation and ma<strong>in</strong>tenance; and<br />

• Antivirus and security.<br />

All <strong>the</strong> universities surveyed had policy development and ma<strong>in</strong>tenance processes def<strong>in</strong>ed. It was found that<br />

policy development processes <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> universities are <strong>of</strong>ten <strong>in</strong>clusive and participatory, which means that <strong>the</strong>y<br />

take considerable time to complete. Thus even though <strong>the</strong> surveyed <strong>in</strong>stitutions have various VLE-related policy<br />

documents <strong>in</strong> development, <strong>in</strong> most cases <strong>the</strong> policies had not yet been approved. Fur<strong>the</strong>r time is <strong>the</strong>n required<br />

before <strong>the</strong> new policies are accessible and/or dissem<strong>in</strong>ated with<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitution and well understood by staff.<br />

However, it was also found that <strong>in</strong> general policies are not dissem<strong>in</strong>ated and understood by staff. In some cases,<br />

each university department was found to be operat<strong>in</strong>g its own <strong>in</strong>ternal systems and networks, which leads to<br />

fragmentation and some departments hav<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>ferior and/or unstable environments. A concern was raised by<br />

respondents <strong>in</strong> terms <strong>of</strong> what mechanisms universities might use to guide or enforce policy implementation.<br />

Technological <strong>in</strong>frastructure<br />

Network <strong>in</strong>frastructure, Internet access, and power supply<br />

Only two <strong>in</strong>stitutions reported that budget and skills capacity were not constra<strong>in</strong>ts for <strong>the</strong> deployment <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

VLE. For <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r <strong>in</strong>stitutions, <strong>the</strong> systems adm<strong>in</strong>istrators made do with exist<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>frastructure (that may not<br />

operate optimally) until more funds became available. In terms <strong>of</strong> connectivity, some network<strong>in</strong>g challenges<br />

were encountered with regard to <strong>the</strong> number <strong>of</strong> students need<strong>in</strong>g to be supported. For example, universities did<br />

not factor <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> need for additional Internet usage dur<strong>in</strong>g scheduled practical sessions <strong>in</strong> campus computer<br />

laboratories. There was also a shortage <strong>of</strong> computer lab space for all students. The location and capacity <strong>of</strong><br />

wireless hotspots also presented challenges: routers experienced overload if <strong>the</strong> maximum number <strong>of</strong> users<br />

connected.<br />

It was found that all <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutions were affected by unreliable and <strong>in</strong>consistent power supply and Internet<br />

availability on campuses. This impacted on adm<strong>in</strong>istrative tasks, as well as <strong>in</strong>terrupt<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> teach<strong>in</strong>g and<br />

learn<strong>in</strong>g us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> VLE. In some cases, <strong>in</strong>stitutions made use <strong>of</strong> generators to deal with <strong>the</strong> unreliable power<br />

supply, although this proved to be an expensive undertak<strong>in</strong>g. As Internet connectivity was found to be generally<br />

unstable, <strong>in</strong>stitutions made use <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir <strong>in</strong>tranets to m<strong>in</strong>imise <strong>the</strong> impact <strong>of</strong> unreliable Internet connectivity.<br />

Hardware and s<strong>of</strong>tware configuration<br />

The configuration <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> hardware is critical for <strong>the</strong> successful deployment <strong>of</strong> a Moodle platform: if <strong>the</strong> server<br />

is underpowered or unstable, this will have a detrimental effect on any educational technology <strong>in</strong>itiatives. A<br />

comparison was done <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Moodle server specifications and configuration at each <strong>in</strong>stitution, as shown <strong>in</strong><br />

Table 2.<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

35


An Investigation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Deployment <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Moodle Virtual Learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Environment at Eight African Universities<br />

Table 2: Moodle server specifications at <strong>the</strong> universities<br />

Servers U1 U2 U3 U4 U5 U6 U7 U8<br />

Operat<strong>in</strong>g<br />

system<br />

Processor<br />

Processor<br />

use<br />

RAM<br />

capacity<br />

Available<br />

RAM<br />

Hard<br />

drives<br />

Drive raid<br />

level<br />

Hard<br />

drive<br />

capacity<br />

Space<br />

available<br />

Network<br />

adaptors<br />

Websites<br />

on server<br />

Memory<br />

usage per<br />

site<br />

Server<br />

cas<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Redhat<br />

32 bit<br />

L<strong>in</strong>ux<br />

2 x E5120<br />

1.86 GHz<br />

CPU<br />

Ubuntu<br />

9.10 32 bit<br />

1 x Intel<br />

E5320<br />

1.86 GHz<br />

CPU<br />

CentOS<br />

5.3 64 bit<br />

L<strong>in</strong>ux<br />

1 x Intel<br />

E5405 2<br />

GHz CPU<br />

FreeBSD<br />

7.2 32 bit<br />

L<strong>in</strong>ux<br />

2 x Intel<br />

X5560<br />

2.8 GHz<br />

CPU<br />

CentOS<br />

5.5 64 bit<br />

L<strong>in</strong>ux<br />

2 x Intel<br />

X5560<br />

2.8 GHz<br />

CPU<br />

CentOS<br />

5.5 64 bit<br />

L<strong>in</strong>ux<br />

1 x Intel<br />

E5405<br />

2.0 GHz<br />

CPU<br />

Ubuntu<br />

10.04 32<br />

bit L<strong>in</strong>ux<br />

1 x Intel<br />

3050<br />

2.13<br />

GHz<br />

CPU<br />

5% 0.1% 0.1% 1% 1% 1% 10% 5%<br />

Slackware<br />

13.1 64<br />

bit L<strong>in</strong>ux<br />

2 x Intel<br />

E5520<br />

2.27 GHz<br />

CPU<br />

3.4 Gb 2 Gb 4 Gb 2 Gb 12 Gb 4 Gb 2 Gb 4 Gb<br />

60% 56% 10% 60% 87% 0.2% 81% 40%<br />

7 2 Not<br />

established<br />

1 4 x 2.5”<br />

7,200<br />

RPM<br />

SATA<br />

6 x 3.5”<br />

7,200<br />

RPM<br />

SATA<br />

1 6 x 3.5”<br />

7,200<br />

RPM<br />

SATA<br />

5 1 5 Not used 5 5 Not used 0<br />

624 Gb 130 Gb 500 Gb 300 Gb 1,420 Gb 1,000 Gb 249 Gb 1,600 Gb<br />

400 Gb 119 Gb 242 Gb 105 Gb 1,380 Gb 500 Gb 71 Gb 1,300 Gb<br />

2 x 1,000<br />

Mb<br />

3 Moodle<br />

sites<br />

20 Mb<br />

per<br />

thread<br />

Tower<br />

cas<strong>in</strong>g<br />

2 x 1,000<br />

Mb<br />

1<br />

Moodle<br />

site<br />

20 Mb<br />

per<br />

thread<br />

Tower<br />

cas<strong>in</strong>g<br />

2 x 1,000<br />

Mb<br />

1 Moodle<br />

site and 1<br />

o<strong>the</strong>r site<br />

20 Mb per<br />

thread<br />

Rackmount<br />

chassis<br />

2 x 1,000<br />

Mb<br />

1 Moodle<br />

site<br />

20 Mb<br />

per<br />

thread<br />

Tower<br />

cas<strong>in</strong>g<br />

4 x 1,000<br />

Mb<br />

1<br />

Moodle<br />

site<br />

20 Mb<br />

per<br />

thread<br />

Rackmount<br />

chassis<br />

2 x 1,000<br />

Mb<br />

1 Moodle<br />

site and<br />

3 o<strong>the</strong>r<br />

sites<br />

20 Mb<br />

per<br />

thread<br />

Rackmount<br />

chassis<br />

1 x 1,000<br />

Mb<br />

1<br />

Moodle<br />

site<br />

24.6<br />

Mb per<br />

thread<br />

Tower<br />

cas<strong>in</strong>g<br />

2x 1,000<br />

Mb<br />

1 Moodle<br />

site<br />

20 Mb<br />

per<br />

thread<br />

Rackmount<br />

chassis<br />

36<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


An Investigation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Deployment <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Moodle Virtual Learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Environment at Eight African Universities<br />

An identified area <strong>of</strong> strength was that <strong>in</strong>stitutions have sufficient server hard drive space available for all course<br />

files. The areas <strong>of</strong> weakness found were that two <strong>in</strong>stitutions (U4 and U7) had <strong>in</strong>sufficient memory to support<br />

<strong>the</strong> grow<strong>in</strong>g number <strong>of</strong> student users and that data redundancy was not always built <strong>in</strong> (i.e. <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitution<br />

would lose data <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> event <strong>of</strong> hard drive failure). In terms <strong>of</strong> hardware and s<strong>of</strong>tware procurement, one<br />

<strong>in</strong>stitution flagged procurement problems – <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> form <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>ternal processes and regulations – as an obstacle<br />

to <strong>the</strong> acquisition <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> necessary hardware for <strong>the</strong> VLE.<br />

One <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> benefits <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>stall<strong>in</strong>g Moodle is its <strong>in</strong>teroperability and ability to <strong>in</strong>tegrate with a variety <strong>of</strong> platforms<br />

(Moodle, 2012b). It was found that a variety <strong>of</strong> operat<strong>in</strong>g systems that were stable for <strong>the</strong> Moodle platform<br />

were be<strong>in</strong>g used by <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutions, with L<strong>in</strong>ux be<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> most popular option.<br />

Ma<strong>in</strong>tenance<br />

Ma<strong>in</strong>tenance must be planned for before failures occur (i.e. preventive ma<strong>in</strong>tenance) and should not be treated<br />

as an afterthought but as an <strong>in</strong>tegral part <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> daily runn<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> systems. At <strong>the</strong> time <strong>of</strong> data collection it<br />

was found that most participat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>stitutions conducted hardware ma<strong>in</strong>tenance on an ad hoc (responsive)<br />

ra<strong>the</strong>r than a planned basis.<br />

The Moodle.org community frequently updates its application s<strong>of</strong>tware with new functionality and bug fixes.<br />

In addition, <strong>the</strong>re are many very useful optional contributed (add-on/plug-<strong>in</strong>) modules that may be <strong>in</strong>stalled<br />

to obta<strong>in</strong> additional functionality <strong>in</strong> a particular Moodle server <strong>in</strong>stallation (Moodle, 2012d). It was found that<br />

s<strong>of</strong>tware updates and upgrades were performed at different tim<strong>in</strong>gs across <strong>in</strong>stitutions, usually on an ad hoc<br />

basis. Additionally, <strong>in</strong>stitutions were found to lag by one or two releases beh<strong>in</strong>d <strong>the</strong> latest version <strong>of</strong> Moodle.<br />

Most <strong>in</strong>stitutions were still us<strong>in</strong>g version 1.9, while version 2+ had been released. However, as an example<br />

<strong>of</strong> cross-<strong>in</strong>stitutional shar<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> knowledge and skills, at a <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI <strong>in</strong>ter-<strong>in</strong>stitutional workshop, a session<br />

was dedicated to shar<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> deployment migratory experience from Moodle v1.9 to Moodle v2.x by an early<br />

adopt<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>stitution (Saide, 2012: 14).<br />

Both <strong>the</strong> server and Moodle <strong>in</strong>stallation runn<strong>in</strong>g on <strong>the</strong> server need to be backed up regularly. It was found<br />

that backup servers were not <strong>in</strong> place at <strong>the</strong> majority <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutions at <strong>the</strong> time <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> survey, which <strong>in</strong>dicates<br />

<strong>the</strong>re would be a delay <strong>in</strong> recovery if <strong>the</strong>re were a server problem. However, all <strong>in</strong>stitutions performed regular<br />

backups. The timeframes varied from <strong>in</strong>stitution to <strong>in</strong>stitution, with one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> universities (U3) only perform<strong>in</strong>g<br />

backups on a monthly basis. All <strong>in</strong>stitutions regularly tested <strong>the</strong>ir backups for recovery purposes.<br />

Technical support<br />

Only four <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> eight <strong>in</strong>stitutions had dedicated e-learn<strong>in</strong>g support centres/units. The benefits <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> presence<br />

<strong>of</strong> a centralised <strong>in</strong>stitutional e-learn<strong>in</strong>g unit have been noted for be<strong>in</strong>g able to provide technical and pedagogical<br />

support to academic staff and students (Mtebe et al., 2011: 290). The existence <strong>of</strong> such centralised support units<br />

was also taken by <strong>the</strong> external project team to be an <strong>in</strong>dication <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> level <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>terest <strong>in</strong> and understand<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> potential <strong>of</strong> us<strong>in</strong>g educational technologies <strong>in</strong> support <strong>of</strong> teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g at project <strong>in</strong>ception with<strong>in</strong><br />

each higher education <strong>in</strong>stitution.<br />

A f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> concern was that only one university (U1) had a dedicated Moodle adm<strong>in</strong>istrator. At <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r<br />

universities, <strong>the</strong> role <strong>of</strong> Moodle adm<strong>in</strong>istrator was performed by a systems adm<strong>in</strong>istrator, who was responsible<br />

for a variety <strong>of</strong> systems, not just <strong>the</strong> Moodle system. A lack <strong>of</strong> priority focus on Moodle may mean that certa<strong>in</strong><br />

adm<strong>in</strong>istrative functions would not get <strong>the</strong> attention <strong>the</strong>y require. In addition, <strong>the</strong> purpose <strong>of</strong> a VLE demands<br />

a deeper understand<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> academic teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g environment <strong>in</strong> order to deploy and ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong> it<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

37


An Investigation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Deployment <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Moodle Virtual Learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Environment at Eight African Universities<br />

successfully; a general systems adm<strong>in</strong>istrator would have to develop such an understand<strong>in</strong>g over time. Equally<br />

concern<strong>in</strong>g was that only one <strong>in</strong>stitution had clearly described <strong>the</strong> roles and responsibilities <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Moodle<br />

adm<strong>in</strong>istrator.<br />

Staff and students need to be oriented to onl<strong>in</strong>e teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g, and tra<strong>in</strong>ed and supported <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> use<br />

<strong>of</strong> Moodle, to be able to engage effectively <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir learn<strong>in</strong>g. It was found that <strong>the</strong> universities recognised <strong>the</strong><br />

importance <strong>of</strong> support<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> Moodle users. It was also found that <strong>in</strong> all but one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutions, regular<br />

staff and student tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g takes place. The lack <strong>of</strong> regular tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g was an issue at <strong>the</strong> university that was <strong>the</strong><br />

most recent to deploy Moodle. In <strong>the</strong> majority <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutions, <strong>in</strong>itial staff tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g was conducted by <strong>the</strong><br />

external project team, which <strong>in</strong>itially focused on staff capacity build<strong>in</strong>g. In most cases, this tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g has been<br />

taken forward by <strong>in</strong>ternal support staff. The higher education <strong>in</strong>stitutions with centralised support units were<br />

at an advantage here as <strong>the</strong> structures were already <strong>in</strong> place to propagate good practice and dissem<strong>in</strong>ate <strong>the</strong><br />

new knowledge acquired.<br />

RECOMMENDATIONS<br />

The <strong>in</strong>tegration <strong>of</strong> educational technology <strong>in</strong>to <strong>the</strong> higher education <strong>in</strong>stitution can be a complex issue. Each<br />

<strong>in</strong>stitution requires clear policies and strategic plans to provide <strong>the</strong> framework for <strong>the</strong> development and<br />

implementation <strong>of</strong> specific support<strong>in</strong>g technologies. Issues that need to be taken <strong>in</strong>to consideration are <strong>the</strong><br />

diversity <strong>of</strong> stakeholders, <strong>ICT</strong> skills levels, staff and student numbers and projected growth, cost-effectiveness<br />

analysis, and staff development <strong>in</strong> new technologies (Sife et al., 2007: 63). F<strong>in</strong>ancial resources are also imperative<br />

to <strong>the</strong> successful implementation and <strong>in</strong>tegration <strong>of</strong> technology <strong>in</strong> education (Sife et al., 2007: 64). For <strong>the</strong><br />

implementation <strong>of</strong> a VLE, careful plann<strong>in</strong>g and <strong>the</strong> allocation <strong>of</strong> resources are required, and <strong>in</strong>stitutions <strong>of</strong>ten<br />

struggle with <strong>in</strong>sufficient funds. The follow<strong>in</strong>g guidel<strong>in</strong>es are relevant for overcom<strong>in</strong>g technological challenges<br />

associated with VLE implementation.<br />

Institutional policy guidel<strong>in</strong>es<br />

The formulation and implementation <strong>of</strong> an e-learn<strong>in</strong>g strategy with a guid<strong>in</strong>g policy is reported by De Freitas<br />

and Oliver (2005) to be a possible driver <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional change. They note a number <strong>of</strong> factors to be considered,<br />

<strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g: cross-<strong>in</strong>stitutional shar<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> lessons regard<strong>in</strong>g successes and failures; consultations with experts,<br />

staff and students; and partnerships with<strong>in</strong> and outside <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitution. It is recommended that a comprehensive<br />

e-learn<strong>in</strong>g and/or VLE policy be developed, approved and implemented at <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional level. This policy<br />

could be stand-alone or an extension <strong>of</strong> any exist<strong>in</strong>g broader <strong>in</strong>stitutional <strong>ICT</strong> or teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g policies.<br />

The creation <strong>of</strong> this policy should be guided by <strong>the</strong> regular, exist<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>stitutional policy development guidel<strong>in</strong>es,<br />

and <strong>the</strong> policy should be easily accessible, clear to understand and, most importantly, enforceable by <strong>the</strong><br />

organisation. Universities are encouraged to <strong>in</strong>tegrate broader aspects <strong>of</strong> general <strong>ICT</strong> policies to ensure an<br />

optimal environment for <strong>the</strong> VLE deployment to support teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g. These po<strong>in</strong>ts <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>tegration<br />

may <strong>in</strong>clude:<br />

• Network and Internet bandwidth;<br />

• Network structure and ma<strong>in</strong>tenance;<br />

• Device provision and ma<strong>in</strong>tenance (th<strong>in</strong> clients, desktops etc.);<br />

• Device- and laboratory-to-user ratios;<br />

• Server procurement, usage and ma<strong>in</strong>tenance; and<br />

• Server disaster recovery (backup and restor<strong>in</strong>g).<br />

It is likely that <strong>the</strong> VLE usage policies <strong>of</strong> different <strong>in</strong>stitutions will be substantially similar, and for this reason it<br />

is recommended that <strong>in</strong>stitutions with a more mature deployment <strong>of</strong> Moodle share policies and lessons learned<br />

38<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


An Investigation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Deployment <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Moodle Virtual Learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Environment at Eight African Universities<br />

from policy development with <strong>the</strong> universities with more recent <strong>in</strong>stallations.<br />

In addition to <strong>the</strong> existence <strong>of</strong> a policy, <strong>the</strong>re should be <strong>in</strong>stitutional guidance regard<strong>in</strong>g how <strong>the</strong> policy is to<br />

be reflected <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> practice <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> university community. Walker (2013) categorizes <strong>in</strong>stitutional good practice<br />

issues as follows: content creation and deployment, <strong>in</strong>tellectual property rights and copyright legislation,<br />

responsible use <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> VLE, and provision for obta<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g fur<strong>the</strong>r help regard<strong>in</strong>g access and ownership issues. It<br />

should be recognized that <strong>the</strong> academic community requires practical guidance around <strong>the</strong>se issues <strong>in</strong> order<br />

to promote ethical use <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> VLE.<br />

Infrastructure guidel<strong>in</strong>es<br />

Network <strong>in</strong>frastructure, Internet access and power supply<br />

Institutions have limited bandwidth, which means that it needs to be used optimally and fairly. The monitor<strong>in</strong>g<br />

<strong>of</strong> network access is required to ensure fair usage. Sufficient bandwidth and access (ei<strong>the</strong>r via wired computer<br />

laboratories or wireless access) is required for students to access Moodle. It is suggested that build<strong>in</strong>gs be<br />

l<strong>in</strong>ked directly to <strong>the</strong> fibre optic trunk to ensure stable network connections. Universities also need to plan for<br />

<strong>in</strong>creased user numbers <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> future.<br />

The issue <strong>of</strong> unreliable power supply should be planned for and mitigated by consistently carry<strong>in</strong>g out scheduled<br />

backup and ma<strong>in</strong>tenance procedures and <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> backup power supply. Similarly, <strong>the</strong> VLE deployment<br />

should make good use <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional <strong>in</strong>tranet to alleviate <strong>the</strong> problem <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>terrupted Internet access.<br />

Academic staff should be prepared to make alternative plans should ei<strong>the</strong>r power or connectivity <strong>in</strong>terruption<br />

occur dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>ir course delivery.<br />

Hardware and s<strong>of</strong>tware configuration guidel<strong>in</strong>es<br />

The study concluded that <strong>the</strong> Moodle.org community (Moodle, 2012b) is <strong>the</strong> best source <strong>of</strong> practical guidance<br />

concern<strong>in</strong>g recommended practices with regard to server hardware and s<strong>of</strong>tware. Several specifications were<br />

suggested for optimal use <strong>of</strong> hardware and s<strong>of</strong>tware based on <strong>the</strong> f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs. These specifications were provided<br />

along with Moodle suggested m<strong>in</strong>imum specifications (Moodle, 2012b). Not<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> hardware specifications for<br />

<strong>the</strong> Moodle server can make it easier to understand <strong>the</strong> possible limitations <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Moodle <strong>in</strong>stallation, while<br />

know<strong>in</strong>g which s<strong>of</strong>tware is <strong>in</strong>stalled will affect how operations are performed on <strong>the</strong> server. Table 3 provides<br />

<strong>the</strong>se specification guidel<strong>in</strong>es as <strong>the</strong>y were at <strong>the</strong> time <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> study. However, <strong>the</strong>y are cont<strong>in</strong>ually updated on<br />

Moodle.org, mak<strong>in</strong>g it a primary reference for new and updated <strong>in</strong>stallations.<br />

Table 3: Suggested optimal server specifications<br />

Specifications<br />

Hardware<br />

Moodle suggested<br />

m<strong>in</strong>imum<br />

Suggested optimal<br />

specifications<br />

Processor Not specified 2 x Intel® Xeon DP 5620<br />

processors – 2.4GHz quad core<br />

RAM capacity Average 1 Gb per 10–20<br />

concurrent users<br />

32 Gb<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

39


An Investigation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Deployment <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Moodle Virtual Learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Environment at Eight African Universities<br />

Number <strong>of</strong> hard drives Not specified 6 x serial attached SCSI (SAS)<br />

– 16 Mb 15,000 RPM hard disk<br />

drives<br />

Hard drive raid level Not specified 5 or 10 depend<strong>in</strong>g on preference<br />

Total hard drive capacity 5 Gb m<strong>in</strong>imum Over 500 Gb<br />

Backup storage As per hard drive capacity Enough storage for backups and<br />

archives<br />

Optical media Not specified DVD-ROM<br />

Number <strong>of</strong> network adapters and<br />

speed<br />

Not specified<br />

2x 1,000 Mb (if one adapter fails,<br />

<strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r takes over)<br />

Server cas<strong>in</strong>g Not specified Rack-mount chassis<br />

Additional server adm<strong>in</strong>istration<br />

access<br />

S<strong>of</strong>tware<br />

Not specified<br />

Remote access via secure shell<br />

(SSH) network protocol<br />

FTP access for transferr<strong>in</strong>g files<br />

to Moodle directories<br />

Operat<strong>in</strong>g system L<strong>in</strong>ux or W<strong>in</strong>dows 64 bit version <strong>of</strong> L<strong>in</strong>ux<br />

Web server Apache or IIS Apache 2<br />

Script<strong>in</strong>g language PHP PHP 5<br />

Database MySQL or PostgreSQL MySQL<br />

Source: Moodle.org (2012b)<br />

The Moodle.org community also provides guidel<strong>in</strong>es for manag<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> site, for example, manag<strong>in</strong>g performance<br />

(Moodle, 2012c). The processor load should be carefully monitored to assess peak usage and determ<strong>in</strong>e if <strong>the</strong><br />

server is overloaded. It is advisable for each Moodle site adm<strong>in</strong>istrator to have a separate account so that an<br />

audit trail can be kept.<br />

Ma<strong>in</strong>tenance guidel<strong>in</strong>es<br />

A comb<strong>in</strong>ation <strong>of</strong> project experience and guidance from <strong>the</strong> Moodle.org community (Moodle, 2012c) provided<br />

a basel<strong>in</strong>e for elements <strong>of</strong> manag<strong>in</strong>g activities such as updates and upgrades for a Moodle server. A ma<strong>in</strong>tenance<br />

process determ<strong>in</strong>es when and how <strong>of</strong>ten ma<strong>in</strong>tenance should occur, and this should cause as little disruption<br />

as possible for <strong>the</strong> m<strong>in</strong>imum amount <strong>of</strong> time. A ma<strong>in</strong>tenance process should <strong>in</strong>clude:<br />

• Hard disk drive and database defragmentation;<br />

• Log check<strong>in</strong>g;<br />

• Server performance optimization;<br />

• Server usage monitor<strong>in</strong>g; and<br />

• Upgrade and update plann<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

A Moodle adm<strong>in</strong>istrator can configure a schedule for automated course backups <strong>of</strong> some or all <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> system’s<br />

parts (Moodle, 2013), usually scheduled for a period <strong>of</strong> low usage. Both <strong>the</strong> server and <strong>the</strong> Moodle <strong>in</strong>stallation<br />

40<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


An Investigation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Deployment <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Moodle Virtual Learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Environment at Eight African Universities<br />

runn<strong>in</strong>g on <strong>the</strong> server need to be backed up to a safe place for a period <strong>of</strong> time as def<strong>in</strong>ed <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> ma<strong>in</strong>tenance<br />

policy. General practice is to keep backups available for five years and <strong>the</strong>n archived for ten or more years. It<br />

should also be noted that Moodle backups from older versions <strong>of</strong> courses can be restored <strong>in</strong> newer versions,<br />

but it is still advisable to back up <strong>the</strong> courses. Backups need to be tested for <strong>the</strong>ir <strong>in</strong>tegrity, to be restored <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

shortest time possible, m<strong>in</strong>imis<strong>in</strong>g downtime. Backups can be stored on writable DVDs and can be performed<br />

weekly or, ideally, nightly. In addition to this, each course resid<strong>in</strong>g on <strong>the</strong> Moodle server should be <strong>in</strong>dividually<br />

backed up on an ad hoc basis by a course creator or teacher with edit<strong>in</strong>g rights for <strong>in</strong>dividual backup purposes.<br />

New features and security fixes are cont<strong>in</strong>ually be<strong>in</strong>g released and hav<strong>in</strong>g an unsecured website conta<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g<br />

sensitive student data is a major risk. Although <strong>the</strong> update process is generally safe, precautions should still<br />

be taken. These should form part <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitution’s upgrade policy, which will also def<strong>in</strong>e <strong>the</strong> best times for<br />

server downtime and <strong>the</strong> process for notify<strong>in</strong>g all relevant parties. Operat<strong>in</strong>g systems are also frequently<br />

updated. Here, too, <strong>the</strong> tim<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> upgrades requires plann<strong>in</strong>g as it may be necessary to reconfigure sett<strong>in</strong>gs or<br />

restart <strong>the</strong> server. Updates/upgrades should be done on a planned monthly basis. When upgrad<strong>in</strong>g Moodle,<br />

<strong>the</strong> latest ‘stable’ versions should be used and not <strong>the</strong> development versions. Consideration needs to be given<br />

to consistency <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>mes that <strong>in</strong>fluence <strong>the</strong> look and feel <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Moodle site as well as <strong>the</strong> operation<br />

<strong>of</strong> any plug<strong>in</strong>s. Institutions should plan <strong>the</strong>ir upgrades and updates very carefully so as not to disrupt <strong>the</strong> live<br />

teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g activities at <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitution. Ideally, major upgrades should occur outside <strong>the</strong> university<br />

terms/semesters, and even m<strong>in</strong>or updates should be effected without perceived disruption to <strong>the</strong> VLE users<br />

(lecturers and students). With <strong>the</strong> Moodle.org site be<strong>in</strong>g constantly updated, this was considered a good source<br />

<strong>of</strong> reference for <strong>in</strong>stitutions when plann<strong>in</strong>g a new <strong>in</strong>stallation or upgrade (Moodle, 2012b).<br />

Technical support guidel<strong>in</strong>es<br />

Unsurpris<strong>in</strong>gly, universities that have functional technical and user support units are <strong>in</strong> a better position to<br />

handle usability issues and o<strong>the</strong>r technical problems, <strong>the</strong>reby encourag<strong>in</strong>g and reta<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g users on <strong>the</strong> system<br />

(Ssekakubo et al., 2011: 236). It is recommended that <strong>in</strong>stitutions establish a dedicated e-learn<strong>in</strong>g unit, which<br />

may start small but grow as Moodle usage <strong>in</strong>creases. This specialised unit needs to be structured so that it<br />

runs parallel to <strong>in</strong>stitutional faculties and departments, support<strong>in</strong>g all staff and students. Ideally <strong>the</strong> head <strong>of</strong><br />

this unit would be answerable to a member <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional senior management, so that <strong>the</strong> unit is not seen<br />

by staff as a subset <strong>of</strong> a particular department or faculty. Hav<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>terests that stretch well beyond technical<br />

support, such a unit should not be part <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> division. While it will work closely with <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional<br />

technical unit, it must be autonomous. Gov<strong>in</strong>dasamy (2002) argues that such a unit should have a pedagogical<br />

foundation, as a prerequisite for successful e-learn<strong>in</strong>g implementation. This <strong>in</strong>dicates that it is difficult and<br />

perhaps unwise to attempt to completely separate <strong>the</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> support function for deployment <strong>of</strong> a VLE from <strong>the</strong><br />

pedagogical purpose that it serves. The e-learn<strong>in</strong>g unit effectively bridges <strong>the</strong> gap between <strong>the</strong> academic and<br />

technical teams and is tasked with ensur<strong>in</strong>g that courses and materials are optimally designed and suit <strong>the</strong>ir<br />

purpose, that <strong>the</strong> onl<strong>in</strong>e learner experience is as ‘friendly’ as possible, and that technology is exploited when<br />

and where appropriate.<br />

It is important for <strong>in</strong>stitutions to engage <strong>in</strong> cont<strong>in</strong>u<strong>in</strong>g pr<strong>of</strong>essional development and shar<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> knowledge,<br />

creat<strong>in</strong>g redundancy with<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> support<strong>in</strong>g units and academic departments. This applies to <strong>ICT</strong> support<br />

units, academic staff development units, e-learn<strong>in</strong>g support units, and <strong>the</strong> academic staff <strong>the</strong>mselves. This<br />

also highlights <strong>the</strong> importance <strong>of</strong> a specialised central support unit that is able to satisfy a variety <strong>of</strong> needs at<br />

a higher education <strong>in</strong>stitution when engag<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> deploy<strong>in</strong>g educational technology to support teach<strong>in</strong>g and<br />

learn<strong>in</strong>g (Twaakyondo & Munaku, 2012).<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

41


An Investigation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Deployment <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Moodle Virtual Learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Environment at Eight African Universities<br />

Adm<strong>in</strong>istrative support is critical to <strong>the</strong> successful <strong>in</strong>tegration <strong>of</strong> technologies <strong>in</strong>to teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />

practices (Sife et al., 2007: 63). The role <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Moodle adm<strong>in</strong>istrative team cannot be underestimated. In<br />

terms <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> amount <strong>of</strong> effort required, EDUCAUSE (2003: 6) reports that <strong>the</strong> e-learn<strong>in</strong>g support requires<br />

<strong>the</strong> follow<strong>in</strong>g activities: assist<strong>in</strong>g with hardware, network or technology (25%); <strong>in</strong>frastructure tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g for<br />

<strong>in</strong>structors (20%); assist<strong>in</strong>g with pedagogy issues (12%); assist<strong>in</strong>g with technology tools and resource selection<br />

(11%); and manag<strong>in</strong>g network availability and capacity (10%).<br />

Care must be taken <strong>in</strong> provid<strong>in</strong>g for <strong>the</strong> tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g and support <strong>of</strong> each <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> required user groups to meet<br />

<strong>the</strong>ir particular needs. Moodle technical staff will require additional technical skills outside <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Moodle<br />

platform. Conversely, general technical staff will require additional tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> specific deployment and<br />

ma<strong>in</strong>tenance <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Moodle server and environment. Responsible academic support staff members, possibly<br />

with<strong>in</strong> some form <strong>of</strong> centralised e-learn<strong>in</strong>g support unit, require <strong>the</strong> knowledge and aptitude to tra<strong>in</strong> and<br />

encourage all staff and students on us<strong>in</strong>g Moodle. EDUCAUSE (2003) categorises <strong>the</strong> support needed <strong>in</strong>to:<br />

equipment and <strong>in</strong>frastructure resources, tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g and course/curriculum resources, support/help resources,<br />

and organis<strong>in</strong>g to support e-learn<strong>in</strong>g. Table 4 provides a summary <strong>of</strong> potential user groups and <strong>the</strong>ir required<br />

skills and responsibilities.<br />

Table 4: Support and user groups, with <strong>the</strong>ir associated responsibilities<br />

User group<br />

Technical staff capacity<br />

System/server<br />

adm<strong>in</strong>istrators<br />

Network<br />

adm<strong>in</strong>istrators<br />

Laboratory<br />

adm<strong>in</strong>istrators<br />

Website<br />

adm<strong>in</strong>istrators<br />

Centralised<br />

e-learn<strong>in</strong>g/virtual<br />

learn<strong>in</strong>g unit<br />

Skills and responsibilities<br />

Pr<strong>of</strong>icient <strong>in</strong> L<strong>in</strong>ux, PHP, MySQL, network<strong>in</strong>g and website host<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

Responsible for anyth<strong>in</strong>g server or s<strong>of</strong>tware related.<br />

Pr<strong>of</strong>icient <strong>in</strong> network<strong>in</strong>g and L<strong>in</strong>ux.<br />

Work closely with system adm<strong>in</strong>istrator.<br />

Responsible for connectivity <strong>of</strong> servers, students and academic staff.<br />

Require m<strong>in</strong>imal network<strong>in</strong>g knowledge but must be able to troubleshoot various<br />

simple network and computer-related issues.<br />

Provide computer support and tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g for students.<br />

Require knowledge <strong>of</strong> L<strong>in</strong>ux, website host<strong>in</strong>g and Moodle.<br />

Implement website changes.<br />

Support <strong>the</strong> system adm<strong>in</strong>istrator.<br />

Requires general knowledge <strong>of</strong> all <strong>the</strong> components <strong>of</strong> Moodle.<br />

Requires <strong>the</strong> knowledge and aptitude to tra<strong>in</strong> and encourage all staff and students<br />

on <strong>the</strong> optimal methods for us<strong>in</strong>g Moodle.<br />

Requires <strong>the</strong> skills to develop and deploy multimedia with<strong>in</strong> Moodle.<br />

Responsible for provid<strong>in</strong>g central support for adm<strong>in</strong>istrators, academic staff and<br />

students.<br />

General user capacity<br />

Course developers Require support and tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g to develop onl<strong>in</strong>e courses.<br />

Facilitators Require support and tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g to facilitate onl<strong>in</strong>e courses.<br />

Students<br />

Require support and tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g to be able to use Moodle and take onl<strong>in</strong>e courses.<br />

42<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


An Investigation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Deployment <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Moodle Virtual Learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Environment at Eight African Universities<br />

CONCLUSION<br />

There are several challenges that need to be carefully considered and addressed <strong>in</strong> order to successfully<br />

implement a VLE with<strong>in</strong> an African higher education context. These <strong>in</strong>clude ensur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>stitutional support<br />

aided by <strong>the</strong> development <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional policies. VLE implementation should take place with<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> context<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> broader <strong>in</strong>stitutional environment. Thus, plans need to be put <strong>in</strong> place to deal with any technical<br />

<strong>in</strong>frastructure limitations <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> form <strong>of</strong> network <strong>in</strong>frastructure, Internet connectivity and electricity supply.<br />

The configuration <strong>of</strong> hardware and s<strong>of</strong>tware toge<strong>the</strong>r with <strong>the</strong> required ma<strong>in</strong>tenance processes needs to be<br />

handled <strong>in</strong> a systematic way. Additionally, adequate support and skills development need to be put <strong>in</strong> place to<br />

support <strong>the</strong> VLE users.<br />

Mak<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> most <strong>of</strong> what a VLE has to <strong>of</strong>fer <strong>in</strong> terms <strong>of</strong> functionality and secur<strong>in</strong>g a stable environment for<br />

support<strong>in</strong>g teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g requires considerable effort and expertise. A full understand<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> ‘what<br />

it takes’ to optimise <strong>the</strong> affordances <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> onl<strong>in</strong>e teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g environment has yet to be achieved<br />

at <strong>the</strong> majority <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se higher education <strong>in</strong>stitutions. The status <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> deployment <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Moodle VLEs<br />

varied considerably, with some <strong>in</strong>stitutions be<strong>in</strong>g early adopters and o<strong>the</strong>rs hav<strong>in</strong>g only recently engaged <strong>in</strong><br />

e-learn<strong>in</strong>g practices. Each <strong>in</strong>stitution undertook a unique approach to <strong>the</strong> deployment <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> VLE. Institutions<br />

made use <strong>of</strong> a top-down (management) approach, a bottom-up approach (<strong>in</strong>dividual academic or technical<br />

driv<strong>in</strong>g person) or an externally funded project opportunity. Support<strong>in</strong>g and ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g each <strong>in</strong>stallation may<br />

require a different <strong>in</strong>stitutional approach <strong>in</strong> terms <strong>of</strong> respond<strong>in</strong>g to drivers and champions, work<strong>in</strong>g with<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

boundaries <strong>of</strong> authorisation paths, and strategy. Never<strong>the</strong>less, with<strong>in</strong> each unique <strong>in</strong>stitutional environment,<br />

<strong>in</strong>itiatives <strong>in</strong> this area should be undertaken <strong>in</strong> a systematic manner ra<strong>the</strong>r than on an ad hoc basis. The benefits<br />

<strong>of</strong> ga<strong>the</strong>r<strong>in</strong>g and shar<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>formation <strong>of</strong> this technical nature across participat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>stitutions were noteworthy.<br />

This verified <strong>the</strong> argument <strong>of</strong> De Freitas and Oliver (2005), who <strong>in</strong>clude cross-<strong>in</strong>stitutional shar<strong>in</strong>g as a factor<br />

to consider when develop<strong>in</strong>g and implement<strong>in</strong>g an e-learn<strong>in</strong>g strategy.<br />

In addition to <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>valuable technical and user support already provided by <strong>the</strong> Moodle.org community, it is<br />

anticipated that <strong>the</strong> current guidel<strong>in</strong>es could help to lay a foundation for <strong>the</strong> provision <strong>of</strong> a robust, stable, secure<br />

and susta<strong>in</strong>able host<strong>in</strong>g environment for VLEs at o<strong>the</strong>r higher education <strong>in</strong>stitutions <strong>in</strong> Africa. Future research<br />

will look at <strong>the</strong> impact <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> adoption <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se guidel<strong>in</strong>es to ensure replicable patterns for implementation<br />

success. Future research could also <strong>in</strong>clude ensur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> susta<strong>in</strong>ability <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> VLE through <strong>in</strong>vestigat<strong>in</strong>g new<br />

affordances <strong>of</strong> technology, such as <strong>the</strong> potential use <strong>of</strong> hosted solutions (through cloud comput<strong>in</strong>g) or a cluster<br />

approach (where <strong>in</strong>stitutions share cross-campus <strong>in</strong>frastructure).<br />

REFERENCES<br />

De Freitas, S. & Oliver, M. (2005). Does e-learn<strong>in</strong>g policy drive change <strong>in</strong> higher education? A case study<br />

relat<strong>in</strong>g models <strong>of</strong> organisational change to e-learn<strong>in</strong>g implementation. Journal <strong>of</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong> Policy and<br />

Management, 27(1), 81–96.<br />

EDUCAUSE. (2003). Highlights <strong>of</strong> e-learn<strong>in</strong>g support practices. Research Bullet<strong>in</strong>, 9, 29 April, Centre for Applied<br />

Research, 1–11.<br />

Gov<strong>in</strong>dasamy, T. (2002). Successful implementation <strong>of</strong> e-learn<strong>in</strong>g pedagogical considerations. Internet and<br />

<strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>, 4, 287–299.<br />

Khan, B. H. (Ed.). (2005). Manag<strong>in</strong>g e-learn<strong>in</strong>g strategies: Design, delivery, implementation and evaluation.<br />

IGI Global. Retrieved 15 December 2013 from www.igi-global.com/chapter/pedagogical-issues/25794<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

43


An Investigation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Deployment <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Moodle Virtual Learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Environment at Eight African Universities<br />

Marquard, S. (2013). DHET new universities ed tech presentation. Learn<strong>in</strong>g Technologies Work<strong>in</strong>g Group.<br />

Department <strong>of</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong> and Tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g (DHET), Pretoria, South Africa.<br />

Moodle. (2012a). Registered Moodle sites. Retrieved 6 November 2012 from https://moodle.org/sites/<br />

Moodle. (2012b). Install<strong>in</strong>g Moodle. Retrieved 6 November 2012 from http://docs.moodle.org/23/en/Install<strong>in</strong>g_<br />

Moodle<br />

Moodle. (2012c). Manag<strong>in</strong>g a Moodle site. Retrieved 6 November 2012 from http://docs.moodle.org/23/en/<br />

Manag<strong>in</strong>g_a_Moodle_site<br />

Moodle. (2012d). Install<strong>in</strong>g plug<strong>in</strong>s. Retrieved 6 November 2012 from http://docs.moodle.org/23/en/Install<strong>in</strong>g_<br />

plug<strong>in</strong>s<br />

Moodle. (2013). Automated course backup. Retrieved 22 May 2013 from http://docs.moodle.org/23/en/<br />

Automated_course_backup<br />

Mtebe, J. S., Dachi, H., & Raphael, H. (2011). Integrat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong>to teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g at <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong><br />

Dar es Salaam. Distance <strong>Education</strong>, 32(2), 289–294.<br />

Saide (South African Institute for Distance <strong>Education</strong>). (2012). <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI <strong>in</strong>ter-<strong>in</strong>stitutional workshop report.<br />

Retrieved 23 May 2013 from www.oerafrica.org/Portals/8/General Resources/2012.04.11 <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI Workshop<br />

Report.pdf<br />

Sife, A. S., Lwoga, E. T., & Sanga, C. (2007). New technologies for teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g: Challenges for<br />

higher learn<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>stitutions <strong>in</strong> develop<strong>in</strong>g countries. International Journal <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong> and Development Us<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Information and Communication Technology, 3(2), 57–67.<br />

Ssekakubo, G., Suleman, H., & Marsden, G. (2011). Issues <strong>of</strong> adoption: Have e-learn<strong>in</strong>g management systems<br />

fulfilled <strong>the</strong>ir potential <strong>in</strong> develop<strong>in</strong>g countries? Proceed<strong>in</strong>gs <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> South African Institute <strong>of</strong> Computer Scientists<br />

and Information Technologists Conference on Knowledge, Innovation and Leadership <strong>in</strong> a Diverse, Multidiscipl<strong>in</strong>ary<br />

Environment, Cape Town, 3–5 October, 231–238.<br />

Stewart, B., Briton, D., Gismond, M., Helle, B., Kennepohl, D., McGreal, R., & Nelson, C. (2007). Choos<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Moodle: An evaluation <strong>of</strong> learn<strong>in</strong>g management systems at Athabasca University. International Journal <strong>of</strong><br />

Distance <strong>Education</strong> Technologies, 5(3), 1–7.<br />

Sumak, B., Hericko, M., Pusnik, M., & Polancic, G. (2011). Factors affect<strong>in</strong>g acceptance and use <strong>of</strong> Moodle:<br />

An empirical study based on TAM. Informatica, 35(1), 91–100.<br />

Twaakyondo, H. & Munaku, M. (2012). Experience <strong>of</strong> course migration from Blackboard to Moodle LMS – A<br />

case study from UDSM. International Journal <strong>of</strong> Comput<strong>in</strong>g and <strong>ICT</strong> Research, 6(2), 33–45.<br />

Unw<strong>in</strong>, T., Kleeson, B., Hollow, D., Williams, J., Oloo, L., Awala, J., Mutimucuio, I., Eduardo, F., & Muianga,<br />

X. (2010). Digital learn<strong>in</strong>g management systems <strong>in</strong> Africa: Myths and realities. Open Learn<strong>in</strong>g, 25(1), 5–23.<br />

Walker, R. (2013). Guidel<strong>in</strong>es for VLE usage (Yorkshare). University <strong>of</strong> York. Retrieved 22 May 2013 from https://<br />

vlesupport.york.ac.uk/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_tab_group_id=_86_1<br />

44<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


An Investigation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Deployment <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Moodle Virtual Learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Environment at Eight African Universities<br />

NOTES:<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

45


The Experience <strong>of</strong> Course Migration from <strong>the</strong> Blackboard to <strong>the</strong> Moodle LMS:<br />

A case study from <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> Dar es Salaam<br />

The Experience <strong>of</strong> Course Migration from<br />

<strong>the</strong> Blackboard to <strong>the</strong> Moodle LMS: A case<br />

study from <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> Dar es Salaam<br />

Hashim M. Twaakyondo<br />

Department <strong>of</strong> Computer Science<br />

University <strong>of</strong> Dar es Salaam,Tanzania<br />

hmtwaaky@yahoo.com<br />

Mulembwa Munaku<br />

University <strong>of</strong> Dar es Salaam, Tanzania<br />

munaku@udsm.ac.tz<br />

ABSTRACT<br />

After ten years <strong>of</strong> us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> Blackboard Learn<strong>in</strong>g Management System (LMS), <strong>in</strong> 2008 <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> Dar es<br />

Salaam (USDM) decided to switch to an open source LMS, pr<strong>in</strong>cipally due to <strong>the</strong> high cost <strong>of</strong> annual licens<strong>in</strong>g<br />

for <strong>the</strong> proprietary system. In addition to <strong>the</strong>ir cost-sav<strong>in</strong>g benefits, open source LMSs <strong>of</strong>fer <strong>the</strong> potential for<br />

customization and for be<strong>in</strong>g community driven and <strong>the</strong>refore community serv<strong>in</strong>g. This case study explores –<br />

primarily through <strong>the</strong> <strong>the</strong>mes <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional organization, staff development, and technical issues that arose <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

course <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> exercise – <strong>the</strong> university’s experience <strong>in</strong> migrat<strong>in</strong>g exist<strong>in</strong>g (Blackboard) courses to <strong>the</strong> Moodle LMS.<br />

The case study analyses <strong>the</strong> processes and outcomes <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> migration <strong>in</strong>itiative, with a view to guid<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>ternal<br />

future plann<strong>in</strong>g. While <strong>the</strong> USDM experience emphasizes that <strong>the</strong> choice <strong>of</strong> migration approach should depend<br />

on locally available resources and particular environmental contexts, it could also provide o<strong>the</strong>r higher education<br />

<strong>in</strong>stitutions with a tried and tested migration process model for replication <strong>in</strong> similar projects.<br />

Keywords: learn<strong>in</strong>g management system (LMS) migration, course migration, Moodle migration, University<br />

<strong>of</strong> Dar es Salaam case study, distance education, Partnership for <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong> <strong>in</strong> Africa (<strong>PHEA</strong>)<br />

<strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiative (ETI)<br />

INTRODUCTION<br />

Information and communication technology (<strong>ICT</strong>) is a pr<strong>in</strong>cipal driver <strong>of</strong> economic development and social change<br />

<strong>the</strong> world over. The <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g use <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g is <strong>in</strong>evitable for <strong>the</strong> purposes <strong>of</strong> improv<strong>in</strong>g<br />

equity, access and quality <strong>of</strong> education. This is because advances <strong>in</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> make it possible to support students’ and<br />

teachers’ activities, enhance collaboration and resources, improve adm<strong>in</strong>istrative processes, deliver programmes<br />

without <strong>the</strong> constra<strong>in</strong>ts <strong>of</strong> physical boundaries, and improve learn<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>teractions among students and <strong>in</strong>structors.<br />

<strong>Higher</strong> education <strong>in</strong>stitutions have adopted a range <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> systems that enhance <strong>the</strong> delivery <strong>of</strong> academic<br />

programmes. This <strong>in</strong>cludes <strong>the</strong> deployment <strong>of</strong> learn<strong>in</strong>g management systems (LMSs), which automate <strong>the</strong><br />

adm<strong>in</strong>istration, documentation, track<strong>in</strong>g, report<strong>in</strong>g and delivery <strong>of</strong> onl<strong>in</strong>e education courses or tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g<br />

programmes. Alias and Za<strong>in</strong>udd<strong>in</strong> (2005) def<strong>in</strong>e an LMS as ‘a s<strong>of</strong>tware application or Web-based technology used<br />

to plan, implement, and assess a specific learn<strong>in</strong>g process’ (2005: 28). Mohawk College (2009) suggests that an<br />

‘LMS can be broadly described as a web-accessible platform for <strong>the</strong> “anytime” delivery, track<strong>in</strong>g and management<br />

46<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


The Experience <strong>of</strong> Course Migration from <strong>the</strong> Blackboard to <strong>the</strong> Moodle LMS:<br />

A case study from <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> Dar es Salaam<br />

<strong>of</strong> education and tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g’ (2009: 5). The deployment <strong>of</strong> LMSs <strong>in</strong> higher education <strong>in</strong>stitutions varies, <strong>in</strong> that<br />

some <strong>in</strong>stitutions use proprietary LMSs while o<strong>the</strong>rs use open source (OS) ones. In recent years, OS LMSs have<br />

become popular and widely used by many <strong>in</strong>stitutions, with many adopt<strong>in</strong>g onl<strong>in</strong>e course-build<strong>in</strong>g applications,<br />

or LMSs, such as Blackboard (previously WebCT) and Moodle, to facilitate onl<strong>in</strong>e learn<strong>in</strong>g (Vrasidas, 2004).<br />

Deployment <strong>of</strong> an LMS is a complex process that requires proper plann<strong>in</strong>g and considerations <strong>of</strong> technological,<br />

pedagogical, ethical, resource support, <strong>in</strong>stitutional and management issues.<br />

The University <strong>of</strong> Dar es Salaam (UDSM) started us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> Blackboard LMS <strong>in</strong> 1998 but after ten years <strong>of</strong> use<br />

decided to switch to an OS LMS, pr<strong>in</strong>cipally due to <strong>the</strong> high costs <strong>of</strong> annual licens<strong>in</strong>g for <strong>the</strong> proprietary system.<br />

Initially, <strong>the</strong> Knowledge Environment for Web-based Learn<strong>in</strong>g, or KEWL, was <strong>in</strong>stalled and tested. However,<br />

<strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitution realized that some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> features <strong>of</strong> KEWL were still under development and decided to opt for<br />

a more robust and stable LMS. Moodle (which has a strong <strong>in</strong>ternational user and developer onl<strong>in</strong>e community)<br />

was <strong>in</strong>stalled <strong>in</strong> 2008, and a few courses were tested before <strong>the</strong> system was fully adopted – an exercise that took<br />

advantage <strong>of</strong>, and benefited from, <strong>the</strong> Partnership for <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong> <strong>in</strong> Africa (<strong>PHEA</strong>) <strong>Education</strong>al Technology<br />

Initiative (ETI).<br />

For some time, <strong>the</strong> two systems ran <strong>in</strong> parallel before a decision was made to migrate users and courses from<br />

Blackboard to Moodle. The biggest challenge was how to perform <strong>the</strong> migration <strong>in</strong> a systematic way so as to avoid<br />

negativity on <strong>the</strong> part <strong>of</strong> faculty and students towards <strong>the</strong> environment, or o<strong>the</strong>r unforeseen circumstances that<br />

could lead to loss <strong>of</strong> confidence <strong>in</strong> Moodle on <strong>the</strong> part <strong>of</strong> staff and students.<br />

UDSM MIGRATION APPROACH AND PROCESSES<br />

LMS migration requires specific plann<strong>in</strong>g and attention. Different <strong>in</strong>stitutions have approached LMS deployment<br />

and <strong>in</strong>tegration differently. The course migration process at UDSM <strong>in</strong>volved a series <strong>of</strong> steps categorized <strong>in</strong> four<br />

different stages, namely: <strong>the</strong> preparatory stage, <strong>the</strong> status identification stage, <strong>the</strong> course and user migration stage,<br />

and <strong>the</strong> evaluation and post-migration audit stage, as shown <strong>in</strong> Figure 1. This process model was created by UDSM<br />

through consultative meet<strong>in</strong>gs with stakeholders as well as desktop research. The aim was to develop <strong>the</strong> most<br />

appropriate process for <strong>the</strong> context.<br />

Figure 1: Stages used for migrat<strong>in</strong>g courses from Blackboard to Moodle<br />

Preparatory<br />

• Institutional<br />

arrangement<br />

• Literature review<br />

• Identification <strong>of</strong><br />

stakeholders<br />

• LMS backup<br />

• Audit <strong>in</strong>struments<br />

Status identification<br />

• Status <strong>of</strong> courses<br />

• Status <strong>of</strong> users<br />

• Exam<strong>in</strong>e <strong>the</strong> usage <strong>of</strong><br />

old LMS<br />

• Visits to academic units<br />

• Prepare identification<br />

(audit) report<br />

Course and user<br />

migration<br />

• Develop template<br />

• Tra<strong>in</strong> staff<br />

• Provide guidance to<br />

staff<br />

• Ensure quality <strong>of</strong><br />

uploaded courses<br />

Evaluation and postmigration<br />

audit<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

47


The Experience <strong>of</strong> Course Migration from <strong>the</strong> Blackboard to <strong>the</strong> Moodle LMS:<br />

A case study from <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> Dar es Salaam<br />

Preparatory stage<br />

The preparatory stage <strong>in</strong>volved list<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> activities that were necessary for <strong>the</strong> course migration process. This<br />

<strong>in</strong>cluded technical preparations that aimed at ensur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> LMS servers were up and runn<strong>in</strong>g and accessible.<br />

Backups (onl<strong>in</strong>e and <strong>of</strong>fl<strong>in</strong>e) <strong>of</strong> courses available <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> Blackboard LMS were made <strong>in</strong> order to guard aga<strong>in</strong>st course<br />

loss <strong>in</strong> case <strong>of</strong> system failure. In addition, dur<strong>in</strong>g this stage key stakeholders were identified and roles def<strong>in</strong>ed, as<br />

shown <strong>in</strong> Table 1.<br />

Table 1: Key stakeholders and <strong>the</strong>ir roles<br />

Key stakeholders Relationship/role Degree <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>in</strong>fluence<br />

Deputy vicechancellor:<br />

Academic<br />

Pr<strong>in</strong>cipal, College<br />

<strong>of</strong> Information and<br />

Communication<br />

Technologies (Co<strong>ICT</strong>)<br />

Centre for Virtual<br />

Learn<strong>in</strong>g (CVL)<br />

Deans <strong>of</strong> schools/<br />

colleges, heads <strong>of</strong><br />

department (academic<br />

units)<br />

Academic staff with<br />

courses <strong>in</strong> Blackboard<br />

Students<br />

Decision mak<strong>in</strong>g at<br />

<strong>in</strong>stitutional level, driver <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> educational technology<br />

strategy<br />

Decision mak<strong>in</strong>g at college<br />

level, and <strong>the</strong> chair <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

project steer<strong>in</strong>g committee<br />

Implementation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> key<br />

projects<br />

Owners <strong>of</strong> programmes <strong>in</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong>ir respective units due to<br />

<strong>the</strong> fact that all courses <strong>in</strong><br />

a programme are owned by<br />

academic units<br />

Creators/users <strong>of</strong> new<br />

educational technologies<br />

Users <strong>of</strong> new educational<br />

technologies: need to be<br />

tra<strong>in</strong>ed and registered to use<br />

<strong>the</strong> migrated courses<br />

High<br />

High<br />

High<br />

High<br />

High<br />

Medium<br />

Actual <strong>in</strong>fluence<br />

Instructed all heads <strong>of</strong> units<br />

to provide cooperation <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

migration process<br />

Oversaw and steered all<br />

migration activities<br />

Mandated to facilitate <strong>the</strong> use<br />

<strong>of</strong> educational technologies<br />

at UDSM, hence day-to-day<br />

implementation <strong>of</strong> project<br />

activities<br />

Instructed academic staff to<br />

cooperate<br />

Migrated and improved<br />

courses from Blackboard to<br />

Moodle<br />

Used <strong>the</strong> migrated courses<br />

<strong>PHEA</strong> F<strong>in</strong>ancial assistance High Provided <strong>the</strong> f<strong>in</strong>ancial<br />

resources needed for <strong>the</strong><br />

migration process<br />

Saide Technical support Medium Developed a quality matrix and<br />

provided capacity build<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong><br />

<strong>in</strong>structional design and course<br />

development<br />

A course audit <strong>in</strong>strument was created to ensure consistency <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>formation collected by staff <strong>in</strong>volved <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

audit exercise that was part <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> preparatory stage. The course audit template is shown <strong>in</strong> Table 2 (below).<br />

48<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


The Experience <strong>of</strong> Course Migration from <strong>the</strong> Blackboard to <strong>the</strong> Moodle LMS:<br />

A case study from <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> Dar es Salaam<br />

Table 2: Course audit template<br />

College/school<br />

Department<br />

Course ID Name Instructor Contact <strong>in</strong>formation Status Comments<br />

Status identification stage<br />

This stage <strong>in</strong>cluded identification <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> status <strong>of</strong> courses and users with<strong>in</strong> Blackboard <strong>in</strong> order to determ<strong>in</strong>e<br />

‘potential courses’ to migrate and ‘non-potential courses’ (i.e. those not considered for migration). A potential<br />

course was def<strong>in</strong>ed as a course that had a reasonable amount <strong>of</strong> subject content <strong>in</strong> it, seen ei<strong>the</strong>r <strong>in</strong> course<br />

documents or, for some, <strong>in</strong> courses uploaded to <strong>the</strong> system. Moreover, o<strong>the</strong>r potential courses were identified<br />

by virtue <strong>of</strong> hav<strong>in</strong>g a sizeable user enrolment and/or high number <strong>of</strong> post<strong>in</strong>gs on <strong>the</strong> discussion board. On <strong>the</strong><br />

o<strong>the</strong>r hand, a ‘non-potential course’ was def<strong>in</strong>ed as a course with a skeleton consist<strong>in</strong>g only <strong>of</strong> a course name and<br />

<strong>in</strong>structor name, yet devoid <strong>of</strong> any substantial content to facilitate learn<strong>in</strong>g. In some cases such courses (sometimes<br />

also referred to as <strong>in</strong>complete courses) would have fictitious names (e.g. a course with a name like ‘xyz’ or ‘demo’).<br />

The primary source <strong>of</strong> data was Blackboard. The audit team was supplied with an adm<strong>in</strong>istrative password, which<br />

was used to obta<strong>in</strong> all necessary data and statistics. The username, course code and email address form a unique<br />

pattern and were <strong>the</strong> basis for track<strong>in</strong>g all users and courses <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> system. The course audit template was used to<br />

document <strong>the</strong> status <strong>of</strong> courses <strong>in</strong> Blackboard. Courses were <strong>the</strong>reafter grouped <strong>in</strong>to three categories: courses to<br />

be migrated without change; courses that needed improvement before migration; and courses that would not be<br />

migrated. It was found that a total <strong>of</strong> 415 courses were registered <strong>in</strong> Blackboard by March 2010, <strong>of</strong> which 146<br />

were potential courses for migration to Moodle. However, a total <strong>of</strong> 120 (28.9%) courses were found suitable<br />

for migration after elim<strong>in</strong>at<strong>in</strong>g repetition <strong>of</strong> multiple copies <strong>of</strong> courses and unused courses. It was observed that<br />

73 courses (60.8%) out <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> 120 courses earmarked for migration were active, while <strong>the</strong> rema<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g 39.2%<br />

were <strong>in</strong>active. Thus, <strong>the</strong> migration project at UDSM targeted 100 courses, spread across discipl<strong>in</strong>es and colleges<br />

(UDSM, 2010).<br />

This stage also <strong>in</strong>volved determ<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> status <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>structors teach<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> courses. In this regard, <strong>the</strong> audit team<br />

visited various departments, schools and colleges to confirm <strong>the</strong> courses identified for migration. It was necessary<br />

to do this <strong>in</strong> order to ensure that all courses identified were still <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> syllabus. Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore, <strong>the</strong> visits <strong>in</strong>tended<br />

to determ<strong>in</strong>e <strong>the</strong> current <strong>in</strong>structor teach<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> course versus <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>structor registered <strong>in</strong> Blackboard. Some <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>structors were contacted via e-mail, us<strong>in</strong>g contact details obta<strong>in</strong>ed from Blackboard. The team also prepared<br />

a work sheet, which was distributed to all schools, to f<strong>in</strong>d new staff who would be <strong>in</strong>terested <strong>in</strong> develop<strong>in</strong>g and<br />

deliver<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>ir courses via Moodle. It was observed that some <strong>in</strong>structors listed <strong>in</strong> Blackboard were no longer<br />

work<strong>in</strong>g for <strong>the</strong> university, some were on leave, and o<strong>the</strong>rs were deceased.<br />

One <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> biggest challenges faced <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> migration process was <strong>in</strong>accuracy <strong>of</strong> data <strong>in</strong> Blackboard. It was difficult to<br />

obta<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> exact number <strong>of</strong> registered users and <strong>the</strong> actual number <strong>of</strong> created courses <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> system. For <strong>in</strong>stance; <strong>the</strong><br />

Blackboard system <strong>in</strong>dicated 19,528 users (regardless <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir status <strong>in</strong> terms <strong>of</strong> us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> system). However, it was<br />

noted that some system users had more than one account with a different log<strong>in</strong> name (<strong>in</strong> some cases, for example, an<br />

<strong>in</strong>dividual might have five accounts). Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore, it was noted that some <strong>in</strong>structors issued a common username<br />

and password to all students. An example <strong>of</strong> this was <strong>the</strong> course CS660 (‘Introduction to Computers and S<strong>of</strong>tware<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

49


The Experience <strong>of</strong> Course Migration from <strong>the</strong> Blackboard to <strong>the</strong> Moodle LMS:<br />

A case study from <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> Dar es Salaam<br />

Eng<strong>in</strong>eer<strong>in</strong>g’) and dp411a (‘Electrical Mach<strong>in</strong>es and Drives II’), where all <strong>the</strong> students used <strong>the</strong> same username ‘cs660’.<br />

Ano<strong>the</strong>r challenge was that 229 courses (55.1%) were not categorized <strong>in</strong>to relevant faculties, schools or colleges.<br />

Some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> courses were wrongly classified, such as <strong>the</strong> only <strong>in</strong>dicated course <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> Faculty <strong>of</strong> Law IS342<br />

(‘Network<strong>in</strong>g’). The course belonged to Computer Science, where course codes start with <strong>the</strong> letters ‘IS’ , whereas<br />

Law course codes start with <strong>the</strong> letters ‘LW’. This problem <strong>of</strong> categorization suggests that <strong>the</strong> majority <strong>of</strong> courses<br />

were not organized properly <strong>in</strong> Blackboard.<br />

In addition, <strong>in</strong>formation <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> Blackboard system had not been updated after <strong>the</strong> first registration. This resulted <strong>in</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> existence <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>valid <strong>in</strong>structor contact details, such as e-mail addresses, <strong>in</strong> Blackboard. For example, over 50% <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> e-mail addresses were no longer valid, as users had ei<strong>the</strong>r fictitious e-mail addresses or had changed <strong>the</strong>ir e-mail<br />

addresses without updat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> system. In some cases, <strong>in</strong>structors had not registered <strong>the</strong>ir e-mail addresses at all.<br />

It became evident that <strong>the</strong> nature <strong>of</strong> courses <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> source LMS (i.e Blackboard <strong>in</strong> this case) could potentially<br />

simplify or complicate <strong>the</strong> migration process, as expla<strong>in</strong>ed below.<br />

Course and user migration stage<br />

Dur<strong>in</strong>g this stage, <strong>the</strong> project team exam<strong>in</strong>ed several migration options and <strong>the</strong>ir associated advantages and<br />

disadvantages. Four options from <strong>the</strong> Colgate University Information Technology Services (ITS) Unit (see Table<br />

3, below) were exam<strong>in</strong>ed. These migration options are redesign, copy – best effort, hybrid, and consultation, with<br />

<strong>the</strong> correspond<strong>in</strong>g significance <strong>of</strong> technical staff and faculty <strong>in</strong>volvement and responsibilities shown <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> table.<br />

Table 3: Explored migration options as adopted from Colgate University’s ITS Unit<br />

Methodology<br />

Redesign<br />

(start<strong>in</strong>g afresh)<br />

Copy – best effort<br />

(use exist<strong>in</strong>g<br />

automated<br />

conversion tools)<br />

Faculty<br />

<strong>in</strong>volvement<br />

Significant<br />

M<strong>in</strong>imal<br />

Technical staff<br />

responsibilities<br />

Extract materials from<br />

Blackboard<br />

Provide materials to faculty or<br />

upload <strong>the</strong>m to Moodle<br />

Assist faculty with course<br />

design advice/Moodle<br />

orientation<br />

Extract materials from<br />

Blackboard<br />

Use exist<strong>in</strong>g conversion tools<br />

to create analogous Moodle<br />

course site, normally <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

current semester's course<br />

Query <strong>the</strong> faculty when<br />

automation questions arise<br />

Faculty responsibilities<br />

Design Moodle course layout<br />

Insert transferred materials <strong>in</strong>to<br />

course<br />

Provide guidance as requested by<br />

migration staff<br />

Verify <strong>the</strong> migrated site,<br />

review<strong>in</strong>g layout and check<strong>in</strong>g<br />

course content<br />

Hybrid M<strong>in</strong>imal Do both <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> above Provide guidance as requested by<br />

migration staff<br />

Verify <strong>the</strong> migrated site,<br />

review<strong>in</strong>g layout and check<strong>in</strong>g<br />

course content<br />

50<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


The Experience <strong>of</strong> Course Migration from <strong>the</strong> Blackboard to <strong>the</strong> Moodle LMS:<br />

A case study from <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> Dar es Salaam<br />

Methodology<br />

Faculty<br />

<strong>in</strong>volvement<br />

Technical staff<br />

responsibilities<br />

Faculty responsibilities<br />

Consultation<br />

(collaborative<br />

effort)<br />

Some<br />

Arrange one or more meet<strong>in</strong>gs<br />

with faculty to review <strong>the</strong><br />

exist<strong>in</strong>g course, design a<br />

Moodle equivalent and<br />

implement <strong>the</strong> new Moodle<br />

course site<br />

Meet with technical staff as<br />

needed to design and develop<br />

<strong>the</strong> course<br />

Optionally, assist with <strong>the</strong> course<br />

implementation<br />

Source: Colgate Moodle (n.d.)<br />

• The redesign approach <strong>in</strong>volves technical staff extract<strong>in</strong>g courses from Blackboard and upload<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>m <strong>in</strong>to<br />

Moodle or giv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> courses to faculty to upload, while provid<strong>in</strong>g orientation on Moodle. While this works,<br />

it does not result <strong>in</strong> better courses <strong>in</strong> terms <strong>of</strong> quality.<br />

• The copy – best effort approach requires <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> automated conversion tools. However, s<strong>in</strong>ce <strong>the</strong> course<br />

structures <strong>of</strong> Moodle are not fully compatible with Blackboard and s<strong>in</strong>ce exist<strong>in</strong>g conversion tools are limited,<br />

this transfer process cannot be fully or simply automated (Moodle n.d.).<br />

• The hybrid approach provides better content as it comb<strong>in</strong>es both <strong>the</strong> copy – best effort and <strong>the</strong> redesign<br />

approaches. Faculty will use <strong>the</strong> better-named, better-organized redesigned content as <strong>the</strong>y update content<br />

uploaded via conversion tools.<br />

• F<strong>in</strong>ally, <strong>the</strong> consultative approach requires arrang<strong>in</strong>g one or more meet<strong>in</strong>gs with faculty to review exist<strong>in</strong>g<br />

courses, design a Moodle equivalent and implement <strong>the</strong> new Moodle course site. This is <strong>the</strong> best option due<br />

to <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>volvement <strong>of</strong> faculty but it requires more resources.<br />

A consultative approach was adopted, and thus this third stage <strong>in</strong>cluded <strong>the</strong> follow<strong>in</strong>g activities:<br />

• Sensitization sem<strong>in</strong>ars – The goal was to highlight <strong>the</strong> need for course migration so as to ga<strong>in</strong> course <strong>in</strong>structors’<br />

acceptance <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> process.<br />

• Download<strong>in</strong>g courses from Blackboard – The technical team downloaded all courses earmarked for migration<br />

from Blackboard and made <strong>the</strong>se courses available to <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>structors.<br />

• Tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g sessions – Instructors were given <strong>the</strong> downloaded course files and were tra<strong>in</strong>ed on how to create and<br />

re-upload <strong>the</strong> courses <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> Moodle LMS while follow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> created template. The purpose <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> template<br />

was to ensure high quality and completeness <strong>of</strong> uploaded courses <strong>in</strong> Moodle. The <strong>in</strong>formation <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> template<br />

<strong>in</strong>cluded, but was not limited to, course objectives, schedules, assessment options, class activities, resources<br />

and references.<br />

• Creation <strong>of</strong> course shells – The technical team created course shells, which toge<strong>the</strong>r with ‘course spaces’ were<br />

used by <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>structors for upload<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>ir improved courses.<br />

Automated tools for migrat<strong>in</strong>g users across learn<strong>in</strong>g platforms were not used due to <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>completeness <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>in</strong>formation <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> Blackboard system. The use <strong>of</strong> such systems would have meant <strong>the</strong> importation <strong>of</strong> dummy<br />

<strong>in</strong>formation on users; hence fresh registration was <strong>the</strong> most appropriate option. Us<strong>in</strong>g this manual approach, no<br />

technical difficulties were experienced <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> course <strong>of</strong> user registration. Initially 70 <strong>in</strong>structors were registered. By<br />

<strong>the</strong> end <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> migration process 120 <strong>in</strong>structors and 3,419 students were registered <strong>in</strong> several courses.<br />

In total, 96 courses were migrated, while 23 new courses <strong>of</strong> good quality were created dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> migration process.<br />

This was due to <strong>the</strong> awareness created, as a result <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>volvement <strong>of</strong> all key stakeholders who were identified<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

51


The Experience <strong>of</strong> Course Migration from <strong>the</strong> Blackboard to <strong>the</strong> Moodle LMS:<br />

A case study from <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> Dar es Salaam<br />

dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> preparation stage.<br />

Evaluation and post-migration audit<br />

An evaluation and post-migration audit <strong>of</strong> migrated courses was <strong>the</strong>n performed. This is a significant stage, which<br />

enabled <strong>the</strong> university to realise <strong>the</strong> extent and success <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> migration process. The audit team used <strong>the</strong> postmigration<br />

audit template; Table 4 provides examples <strong>of</strong> some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> extracted data.<br />

Table 4: Sample data from <strong>the</strong> post-migration audit<br />

College/school<br />

Department<br />

Course ID EP 203 IS 273<br />

Course name<br />

‘<strong>Education</strong>al and Career Guidance<br />

and Counsell<strong>in</strong>g’<br />

‘Introduction to Unix Systems’<br />

Instructor Luka Mkonongwa M Munaku<br />

Contact <strong>in</strong>formation lmkonongwa@yahoo.co.uk munaku@udsm.ac.tz<br />

Instructor <strong>in</strong>formation Available Available<br />

Course objective Available Available<br />

Course calendar Nil Available<br />

Number <strong>of</strong> users 956 86<br />

Course modules Modules for eight weeks uploaded Modules for 14 weeks uploaded<br />

Number <strong>of</strong> assignments four four<br />

Number <strong>of</strong> forums eight three<br />

Number <strong>of</strong> course views<br />

505 records<br />

Highest view (Forum 8), Lowest<br />

view (0) – Discussion 2 to 6.<br />

10,767 records<br />

Highest view (871) – Forum 2<br />

Lowest view (41) – Forum 1<br />

Remarks Need improvement There are six announcements.<br />

The course materials seem to be<br />

sufficient.<br />

LESSONS LEARNED<br />

Several issues were faced and lessons learned dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> process <strong>of</strong> migrat<strong>in</strong>g courses from Blackboard to Moodle.<br />

Motive for LMS migration<br />

As mentioned, <strong>the</strong> university decided to switch to <strong>the</strong> Moodle LMS due to <strong>the</strong> high cost <strong>of</strong> annual licens<strong>in</strong>g for <strong>the</strong><br />

Blackboard system. The shift has been a wise one <strong>in</strong> this regard, as currently no licence costs are encountered. This<br />

does not mean, though, that <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Moodle LMS is cost free; <strong>the</strong>re are o<strong>the</strong>r costs, such as customizations,<br />

upgrades, and system ma<strong>in</strong>tenance services. None<strong>the</strong>less, <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> an OS LMS does <strong>of</strong>fer sav<strong>in</strong>gs, as noted by<br />

Drozdik, Kovács and Kochis (2005), who argue that decision makers need to f<strong>in</strong>d opportunities for sav<strong>in</strong>gs through<br />

<strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> OS. Gozdiskowski and Chen (2007) also state that OS systems are develop<strong>in</strong>g popularity <strong>in</strong> higher<br />

52<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


The Experience <strong>of</strong> Course Migration from <strong>the</strong> Blackboard to <strong>the</strong> Moodle LMS:<br />

A case study from <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> Dar es Salaam<br />

education ‘because <strong>the</strong>y have a much lower cost, can be more customized, make license management easier, and<br />

<strong>the</strong>y are community-driven and community serv<strong>in</strong>g’ (2007: 1).<br />

Key stakeholder <strong>in</strong>volvement<br />

The engagement <strong>of</strong> key stakeholders (as identified <strong>in</strong> Table 1, above) was very important for <strong>the</strong> success <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

migration process. Strategic <strong>in</strong>volvement <strong>of</strong> stakeholders secured buy-<strong>in</strong> from university management and academic<br />

staff alike. For <strong>in</strong>stance, once <strong>the</strong> audit team had visited <strong>the</strong> departments to determ<strong>in</strong>e whe<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>structors<br />

as listed <strong>in</strong> Blackboard were still teach<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> courses, it was found that <strong>in</strong>structors for 106 <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> courses (out <strong>of</strong><br />

120 earmarked courses for migration) were still present and ready to shift <strong>the</strong>ir courses to <strong>the</strong> new LMS. However,<br />

<strong>the</strong> rema<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g 14 courses had no <strong>in</strong>structors because some were no longer work<strong>in</strong>g for <strong>the</strong> university, on leave, or<br />

deceased. In this case, alternative <strong>in</strong>structors were needed and <strong>the</strong> heads <strong>of</strong> department (identified from <strong>the</strong> outset<br />

as key stakeholders) managed to provide alternative <strong>in</strong>structors for <strong>the</strong>se rema<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g courses. Solv<strong>in</strong>g this problem<br />

would have been difficult without <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>volvement <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> heads <strong>of</strong> departments and course <strong>in</strong>structors. This f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g<br />

is re<strong>in</strong>forced by <strong>the</strong> work <strong>of</strong> Doherty and Honey (2006), which emphasises <strong>the</strong> key role that lecturers/<strong>in</strong>structors<br />

play <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> LMS <strong>in</strong>tegration and migration processes.<br />

It is thus crucial that <strong>the</strong> course migration exercise be properly planned by identify<strong>in</strong>g key stakeholders and clearly<br />

def<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>ir roles.<br />

Quality <strong>of</strong> courses <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> LMS<br />

The migration process revealed that creat<strong>in</strong>g quality courses needs to be emphasized and planned for <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> design<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> migration processes. This <strong>in</strong>cludes stipulat<strong>in</strong>g quality criteria and identify<strong>in</strong>g mechanisms to achieve <strong>the</strong><br />

desired quality parameters. Modalities for <strong>in</strong>volvement <strong>of</strong> academic staff need to be exam<strong>in</strong>ed because <strong>the</strong>se staff<br />

have a significant contribution to make <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> output <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> courses. For example, given <strong>the</strong> many barriers that<br />

faculty typically encounter when work<strong>in</strong>g with <strong>in</strong>structional technologies (Br<strong>in</strong>thaupt, Clayton & Draude, 2009),<br />

it is not surpris<strong>in</strong>g that a number <strong>of</strong> faculty-related behavioural and technical issues arose dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> transition<br />

process. One adm<strong>in</strong>istrative issue noted was <strong>the</strong> lack <strong>of</strong> compensation for <strong>the</strong> time required to convert courses<br />

from one LMS (form) to ano<strong>the</strong>r. This brought a lot <strong>of</strong> challenges as <strong>the</strong> success <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> process depended so much<br />

on staff time devoted to <strong>the</strong> activity.<br />

In many cases, <strong>the</strong> desired quality <strong>of</strong> courses could not be achieved due to time constra<strong>in</strong>ts. The situation was<br />

handled through provid<strong>in</strong>g several tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g sessions, which were also used by academic staff to improve <strong>the</strong>ir course<br />

content. As Nkonge and Gueldenzoph (2006) state, ‘time can be less <strong>of</strong> an issue, we believe, if mandatory faculty<br />

tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g is established and made available on a cont<strong>in</strong>uous basis’ (2006: 42).<br />

Instructional and pedagogical issues<br />

Dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> migration process most lecturers experienced a new virtual learn<strong>in</strong>g environment (VLE). Most were<br />

eager to know, among o<strong>the</strong>r th<strong>in</strong>gs, how <strong>the</strong> system would help <strong>the</strong>m deliver more effective teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />

processes. It is understood that LMSs <strong>of</strong>fer a variety <strong>of</strong> tools to deliver course material and facilitate communication<br />

among students and between <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>structor and students. Hence tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g sessions were provided on <strong>in</strong>structional<br />

design and how different tools <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> new LMS could be used to enhance teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g. The importance<br />

<strong>of</strong> this is highlighted by Vitartis, Sloan, Poh and Dunlop (2001), who state that ‘<strong>of</strong>fer<strong>in</strong>g learn<strong>in</strong>g programs<br />

<strong>of</strong>fshore via onl<strong>in</strong>e technologies fur<strong>the</strong>r complicates <strong>the</strong> pedagogical issues which must be considered <strong>in</strong> adopt<strong>in</strong>g<br />

and adapt<strong>in</strong>g a LMS’ (2001: 169). Kam<strong>in</strong>ski (2005) highlights <strong>the</strong> fact that ‘Practitioners need time to learn<br />

technology-related teach<strong>in</strong>g skills, to learn how to use technology, to experiment with it and how to <strong>in</strong>tegrate it<br />

<strong>in</strong>to <strong>the</strong> school curriculum’ (2005).<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

53


The Experience <strong>of</strong> Course Migration from <strong>the</strong> Blackboard to <strong>the</strong> Moodle LMS:<br />

A case study from <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> Dar es Salaam<br />

Dur<strong>in</strong>g migration, tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g sessions on <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> new LMS took <strong>in</strong>to consideration pedagogical issues <strong>in</strong>herent<br />

<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> LMS, as most systems have system-specific tools to address particular pedagogical issues. It should be noted<br />

that LMSs designed with more constructivist pedagogy <strong>in</strong> m<strong>in</strong>d – and Moodle is an example <strong>of</strong> such an LMS –<br />

make it possible for novice <strong>in</strong>structors to explore pedagogical options more freely (Lane, 2008: 6). Hence, tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g<br />

sessions need to be designed so as to encourage ownership and impart unique pedagogical craftsmanship.<br />

Institutional policies on <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> LMS<br />

Institutional policies on <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> LMS have an impact on <strong>the</strong> migration process. For example, <strong>the</strong> absence<br />

<strong>of</strong> such enforcement policies makes <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> LMS voluntary for staff. Indeed, at UDSM <strong>in</strong>itially some users<br />

were reluctant to use <strong>the</strong> new system due to <strong>the</strong> absence <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional directives or policies on <strong>the</strong> matter. In <strong>the</strong><br />

end, this was handled through specific directives issued by <strong>the</strong> deputy vice-chancellor: adm<strong>in</strong>istration to all heads<br />

<strong>of</strong> academic units, requir<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> latter to ensure <strong>the</strong> migration team was given <strong>the</strong> necessary cooperation as well<br />

as <strong>the</strong> participation <strong>of</strong> lecturers for specific subjects.<br />

Thus, <strong>the</strong>re is a need to have <strong>in</strong>stitutional policies that enforce <strong>the</strong> deployment and use <strong>of</strong> an LMS. In addition,<br />

before <strong>the</strong> migration process starts, specific directives need to be given to all heads <strong>of</strong> units for <strong>the</strong> users to<br />

comply, as <strong>the</strong> support from top management adds value <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> process. This is supported by McPherson and<br />

Nunes (2006), who argue that if LMS implementation (<strong>in</strong> this case, migration) is to be successful, <strong>the</strong> university<br />

‘must manage <strong>the</strong> change process by propos<strong>in</strong>g and agree<strong>in</strong>g on goals through consensual debate, support<strong>in</strong>g<br />

strategies appropriately and <strong>the</strong>n realis<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>se through common commitment’ (2006: 1). Institutionally supported<br />

e-learn<strong>in</strong>g implementation and <strong>in</strong>stitutionally supported capacity build<strong>in</strong>g for e-learn<strong>in</strong>g seemed <strong>the</strong> right approach,<br />

as suggested by Bates (1999), Davis and Fill (2007) and Aczel, Peake and Hardy (2008).<br />

Nature <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> courses <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> source LMS<br />

The nature <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> courses <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> source LMS (<strong>in</strong> this case, Blackboard) had a great impact on <strong>the</strong> migration process.<br />

For <strong>in</strong>stance, it was found that 229 courses (55.1% <strong>of</strong> all courses <strong>in</strong> Blackboard) were not categorized, despite <strong>the</strong><br />

fact that <strong>the</strong>y belonged to faculties/schools/colleges. Also, some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> courses were wrongly classified, hence <strong>the</strong><br />

difficulties faced <strong>in</strong> obta<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g course-related <strong>in</strong>formation from relevant departments. Some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>formation<br />

perta<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g to <strong>in</strong>structors was ei<strong>the</strong>r not registered or outdated. This presented challenges <strong>in</strong> contact<strong>in</strong>g course<br />

<strong>in</strong>structors for <strong>the</strong> migration exercise.<br />

This was alleviated for <strong>the</strong> future by disabl<strong>in</strong>g some features <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> new LMS (Moodle) such as self-registration<br />

(Blackboard had allowed self-registration). It was fur<strong>the</strong>r noted that <strong>the</strong>re is a need to cont<strong>in</strong>ually update <strong>the</strong><br />

courses <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> LMS as well as hav<strong>in</strong>g some contact <strong>in</strong>formation as mandatory fields (e.g. e-mail, mobile phone<br />

etc.) dur<strong>in</strong>g registration <strong>of</strong> users <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> LMS. This enhances communication and speeds up processes whenever<br />

course migration takes place.<br />

Support mechanisms and handl<strong>in</strong>g technical issues<br />

Support mechanisms for LMS users are essential for build<strong>in</strong>g positive user attitudes towards <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> LMS<br />

<strong>in</strong> teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g. Tallent-Runnels et al. (2006) reviewed several studies and concluded that all <strong>in</strong>structors<br />

and students need tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g and support dur<strong>in</strong>g an LMS transition process; such support would be technical and/<br />

or pedagogical. Dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> UDSM migration process it became evident that some <strong>in</strong>structors did not want to<br />

migrate <strong>the</strong>ir courses due to lack <strong>of</strong> end-user support experienced while us<strong>in</strong>g Blackboard. In addition, <strong>in</strong> 2005<br />

<strong>the</strong> Blackboard LMS at UDSM had become corrupted and most lecturers had lost <strong>the</strong>ir course materials. At that<br />

time, <strong>the</strong> support structures at UDSM were not well established. Such experiences impacted negatively on users’<br />

attitudes towards <strong>the</strong> LMS and thus had ramifications for <strong>the</strong> process <strong>of</strong> course migration.<br />

54<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


The Experience <strong>of</strong> Course Migration from <strong>the</strong> Blackboard to <strong>the</strong> Moodle LMS:<br />

A case study from <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> Dar es Salaam<br />

Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore, technical difficulties such as connectivity problems arose dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> process <strong>of</strong> course migration.<br />

Offl<strong>in</strong>e facilities (e.g. Poodle) were used to address connectivity issues. In this respect, <strong>the</strong>re is a need to establish<br />

good support structures that will assist <strong>in</strong> help<strong>in</strong>g system users before, dur<strong>in</strong>g and after <strong>the</strong> course migration process.<br />

The technical support team needs to ensure <strong>the</strong> system is available and <strong>the</strong> necessary backups are performed from<br />

time to time.<br />

Institutional reforms<br />

LMS ma<strong>in</strong>tenance and updat<strong>in</strong>g processes need to respond promptly to <strong>in</strong>stitutional reforms as <strong>the</strong>y may affect <strong>the</strong><br />

process <strong>of</strong> course migration. At <strong>the</strong> time <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> course migration, <strong>the</strong>re were several <strong>in</strong>stitutional reforms – such as<br />

course modularization and <strong>in</strong>stitutional structural changes – tak<strong>in</strong>g place. The former led to new curricula for some<br />

programmes, while <strong>the</strong> latter brought about changes by replac<strong>in</strong>g faculties with schools and departments. These<br />

structural changes had implications for course categorisation <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> LMS. Despite <strong>the</strong> fact that <strong>the</strong>se changes had<br />

been <strong>in</strong>troduced <strong>in</strong> 2008, <strong>the</strong>y were still not reflected <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> LMS two years later, and <strong>the</strong> courses <strong>in</strong> Blackboard<br />

were still grouped under faculties that no longer existed.<br />

Thus, <strong>the</strong> study revealed that <strong>the</strong>re is a need to cont<strong>in</strong>ually update <strong>in</strong>stitutional data <strong>in</strong> LMSs deployed with<strong>in</strong> our<br />

situations as this may affect any migration process that must be conducted.<br />

CONCLUSION<br />

Like many higher education <strong>in</strong>stitutions, UDSM has successfully migrated courses from <strong>the</strong> Blackboard to <strong>the</strong><br />

Moodle LMS. The <strong>in</strong>stitution’s experience <strong>in</strong> this regard shows that course migration needs to focus not only on <strong>the</strong><br />

technological aspects <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> process but also on <strong>the</strong> pedagogical dimension. This is ma<strong>in</strong>ly because <strong>the</strong>re is noth<strong>in</strong>g<br />

significantly different about teach<strong>in</strong>g through an OS LMS compared to a commercial one. What is different is <strong>the</strong><br />

tool itself, and <strong>the</strong> support, adaptability and ease <strong>of</strong> use <strong>of</strong>fered by <strong>the</strong> compet<strong>in</strong>g systems.<br />

The literature reviewed revealed a variety <strong>of</strong> options for migrat<strong>in</strong>g courses from one LMS to ano<strong>the</strong>r. What is<br />

important, however, is for an <strong>in</strong>stitution to choose an approach that is most appropriate for its context. Such an<br />

approach should take <strong>in</strong>to account <strong>in</strong>stitutional legacies and <strong>the</strong> resources available. Whatever approach is adopted,<br />

<strong>the</strong> current study showed that key issues that need to be considered <strong>in</strong>clude stakeholder <strong>in</strong>volvement, levels <strong>of</strong><br />

commitment by <strong>in</strong>stitutional leadership, and sound support mechanisms. It is hoped that o<strong>the</strong>r <strong>in</strong>stitutions may<br />

f<strong>in</strong>d this case study useful <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir quest for a systematic approach to LMS migration.<br />

REFERENCES<br />

Aczel, J. C., Peake, S. R., & Hardy, P. (2008). Design<strong>in</strong>g capacity-build<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> e-learn<strong>in</strong>g expertise: Challenges and<br />

strategies. Computers & <strong>Education</strong>, 50(2), 499–510.<br />

Alias, N. A. & Za<strong>in</strong>udd<strong>in</strong>, A. M. (2005). Innovation for better teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g: Adopt<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />

management system. Malaysian Onl<strong>in</strong>e Journal <strong>of</strong> Instructional Technology, 2(2), 27–40.<br />

Bates, A. W. (1999). Manag<strong>in</strong>g technological change: Strategies for academic leaders. Jossey Bass, San Francisco.<br />

Br<strong>in</strong>thaupt, T. M., Clayton, M. A., & Draude, B. J. (2009). Barriers to and strategies for faculty <strong>in</strong>tegration <strong>of</strong><br />

IT. In P. Rogers, G. Berg, J. Boettcher, C. Howard, L. Justice, & K. Schenk (Eds), Encyclopedia <strong>of</strong> distance learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />

(2nd Ed.), 138–145. IGI Global, Hershey, PA.<br />

Colgate Moodle (n.d.). Course content migration. Moodle <strong>in</strong>formation. Colgate Moodle. Retrieved 2 November<br />

2013 from https://sites.google.com/a/colgate.edu/moodle/Home/blackboard-content<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

55


The Experience <strong>of</strong> Course Migration from <strong>the</strong> Blackboard to <strong>the</strong> Moodle LMS:<br />

A case study from <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> Dar es Salaam<br />

Davis, H. C. & Fill, K. (2007). Embedd<strong>in</strong>g blended learn<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> a university’s teach<strong>in</strong>g culture: Experiences and<br />

reflections. British Journal <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology, 38(5), 817–828.<br />

Doherty, I. & Honey, M. (2006). Tak<strong>in</strong>g ownership <strong>of</strong> technology: Lecturers as LMS learners. Proceed<strong>in</strong>gs <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

23rd Annual Ascilite Conference: Who’s learn<strong>in</strong>g? Whose technology? Sydney.<br />

Drozdik, S., Kovács, G. L., & Kochis, P. Z. (2005). Risk assessment <strong>of</strong> an open source migration project. Proceed<strong>in</strong>gs<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> First International Conference on Open Source Systems, Geneva, 246–249.<br />

Gozdiskowski, M. & Chen, W. (2007). Open source s<strong>of</strong>tware <strong>in</strong> virtual university development: An overview. In<br />

C. Montgomerie & J. Seale (Eds), Proceed<strong>in</strong>gs <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> World Conference on <strong>Education</strong>al Multimedia, Hypermedia and<br />

Telecommunications 2007, Chesapeake, VA, 603–605.<br />

Kam<strong>in</strong>ski, J. (2005). Editorial: Moodle – A user-friendly, open source course management system. Onl<strong>in</strong>e Journal<br />

<strong>of</strong> Nurs<strong>in</strong>g Informatics (OJNI), 9(1). Retrieved 2 December 2013 from http://ojni.org/9_1/talktech.htm<br />

Lane, L. M. (2008). Toolbox or trap? Course management systems and pedagogy. EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY, 2.<br />

Retrieved 1 December 2013 from https://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/EQM0820.pdf<br />

McPherson, M. & Nunes, M. B. (2006). Organisational issues for e-learn<strong>in</strong>g: Critical success factors as identified<br />

by HE practitioners. International Journal <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Management, 20(7), 542–558.<br />

Mohawk College. (2009). F<strong>in</strong>al report <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> LMS project. Retrieved 25 November 2013 from http://lmsreview.<br />

mohawkcollege.ca/docs/LMSreviewF<strong>in</strong>alReport_ModifiedBrief.pdf<br />

Moodle (n.d.). Blackboard migration. Version 2.2. Retrieved 21 October 2013 from http://docs.moodle.org/22/<br />

en/Blackboard_migration<br />

Nkonge, B. & Gueldenzoph, L. E. (2006). Best practices <strong>in</strong> onl<strong>in</strong>e education: Implications for policy and practice.<br />

Bus<strong>in</strong>ess <strong>Education</strong> Digest, 15, 42–53.<br />

Tallent-Runnels, M. K., Thomas, J. A., Lan, W. Y., Cooper, S., Ahern, T. C., Shaw, S. M., & Xiaom<strong>in</strong>g, L.<br />

(2006). Teach<strong>in</strong>g courses onl<strong>in</strong>e: A review <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> research. Review <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Research, 76, 93–135. doi:<br />

10.3102/00346543076001093<br />

UDSM (University <strong>of</strong> Dar es Salaam). (2010). Blackboard courses audit report. UDSM, June.<br />

Vitartis, P, Sloan K, Poh, P, & Dunlop, M. (2001). An assessment <strong>of</strong> cross-cultural and social network <strong>in</strong>fluences<br />

on <strong>the</strong> delivery <strong>of</strong> an <strong>in</strong>ternational teach<strong>in</strong>g model utilis<strong>in</strong>g a computer-mediated approach. In G. Kennedy, M.<br />

Keppell, C. McNaught & T. Petrovic (Eds), Meet<strong>in</strong>g at <strong>the</strong> crossroads. Proceed<strong>in</strong>gs <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> 18th Annual Conference <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> Australian Society for Computers <strong>in</strong> Learn<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> Tertiary <strong>Education</strong>, Melbourne, 169–174.<br />

Vrasidas, C. (2004). Issues <strong>of</strong> pedagogy and design <strong>in</strong> e-learn<strong>in</strong>g systems. Communications <strong>of</strong> ACM. Retrieved 29<br />

November 2013 from http://portal.acm.org.ezproxy.massey.ac.nz/citation.cfm?id=968086&coll=portal&dl=A<br />

CM&CFID=32263271&CFTOKEN=96032385<br />

56<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


The Experience <strong>of</strong> Course Migration from <strong>the</strong> Blackboard to <strong>the</strong> Moodle LMS:<br />

A case study from <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> Dar es Salaam<br />

NOTES:<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

57


Us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> Moodle Learn<strong>in</strong>g Management System for Teach<strong>in</strong>g and<br />

Learn<strong>in</strong>g at <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong>, W<strong>in</strong>neba<br />

Us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> Moodle Learn<strong>in</strong>g Management<br />

System for Teach<strong>in</strong>g and Learn<strong>in</strong>g at <strong>the</strong><br />

University <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong>, W<strong>in</strong>neba<br />

Issifu Yidana<br />

Department <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>Education</strong>, Faculty <strong>of</strong> Science<br />

University <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong>, W<strong>in</strong>neba, Ghana<br />

iyidana@uew.edu.gh; yyidana@yahoo.com<br />

Frederick Kwaku Sarfo<br />

Department <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Leadership<br />

Faculty <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong> and Communication Sciences<br />

College <strong>of</strong> Technology <strong>Education</strong><br />

University <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong>, W<strong>in</strong>neba, Ghana<br />

sarf<strong>of</strong>redk2001@yahoo.com<br />

Alexander Kyei Edwards<br />

Center for <strong>Education</strong>al Policy Studies<br />

University <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong>, W<strong>in</strong>neba, Ghana<br />

aedwards@uew.edu.gh<br />

Raymond Boison<br />

Management Information System Department<br />

University <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong>, W<strong>in</strong>neba, Ghana<br />

rayboison@yahoo.com<br />

Osafo Apeanti Wilson<br />

Faculty <strong>of</strong> Science<br />

University <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong>, W<strong>in</strong>neba, Ghana<br />

osafoapeanti@googlemail.com<br />

ABSTRACT<br />

<strong>Higher</strong> education <strong>in</strong>stitutions <strong>in</strong> Africa face many challenges, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g large class sizes, shortage <strong>of</strong> high quality<br />

learn<strong>in</strong>g materials, lack <strong>of</strong> experienced pr<strong>of</strong>essors, and rigid/<strong>in</strong>flexible lecture timetables. The current case study<br />

recounts <strong>the</strong> experiences <strong>of</strong> Ghana’s University <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong>, W<strong>in</strong>neba (UEW) <strong>in</strong> implement<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> Moodle virtual<br />

learn<strong>in</strong>g environment as a strategy for address<strong>in</strong>g some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se problems and improv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> quality <strong>of</strong> teach<strong>in</strong>g<br />

and learn<strong>in</strong>g. This <strong>in</strong>itiative, implemented between 2009 and 2013, was sponsored by <strong>the</strong> Partnership for <strong>Higher</strong><br />

<strong>Education</strong> <strong>in</strong> Africa <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiative, with technical support from <strong>the</strong> South African Institute for<br />

Distance <strong>Education</strong>. Us<strong>in</strong>g various qualitative data-ga<strong>the</strong>r<strong>in</strong>g techniques <strong>the</strong> study revealed that use <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Moodle<br />

learn<strong>in</strong>g management system impacted positively on <strong>in</strong>structors and students alike <strong>in</strong> terms <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> teach<strong>in</strong>g and<br />

learn<strong>in</strong>g processes. The availability <strong>of</strong> learn<strong>in</strong>g resources promoted <strong>in</strong>dependent learn<strong>in</strong>g by students and provided<br />

opportunities for students to be <strong>in</strong> control <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir learn<strong>in</strong>g processes – important pedagogical benefits. The study<br />

also highlighted, though, <strong>the</strong> many challenges faced by students and lecturers <strong>in</strong> us<strong>in</strong>g education technology at<br />

<strong>the</strong> university, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g regular power blackouts, poor Internet connectivity, <strong>in</strong>adequate computer facilities for<br />

students, and lack <strong>of</strong> recognition for academic staff who take <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>itiative to use educational technologies <strong>in</strong><br />

teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g. The study recommends that <strong>the</strong> university make more <strong>in</strong>vestments <strong>in</strong> improv<strong>in</strong>g campus<br />

facilities <strong>in</strong> order to enhance easy access by students. More tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>terventions should also be <strong>in</strong>troduced <strong>in</strong><br />

order to acqua<strong>in</strong>t staff and students with relevant skills <strong>in</strong> us<strong>in</strong>g Moodle.<br />

Keywords: learn<strong>in</strong>g management systems (LMS), Moodle, collaboration, University <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong>, W<strong>in</strong>neba<br />

case study, Partnership for <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong> <strong>in</strong> Africa (<strong>PHEA</strong>) <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiative (ETI)<br />

58<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


Us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> Moodle Learn<strong>in</strong>g Management System for Teach<strong>in</strong>g and<br />

Learn<strong>in</strong>g at <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong>, W<strong>in</strong>neba<br />

INTRODUCTION<br />

<strong>Higher</strong> education <strong>in</strong>stitutions <strong>in</strong> Africa face many challenges, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g large class sizes, shortage <strong>of</strong> high quality<br />

learn<strong>in</strong>g materials, lack <strong>of</strong> experienced pr<strong>of</strong>essors, and rigid/<strong>in</strong>flexible lecture timetables. Many <strong>in</strong>stitutions are<br />

harness<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> affordances <strong>of</strong> educational technologies <strong>in</strong> order to address some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se challenges. This case<br />

study recounts <strong>the</strong> experiences <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong>, W<strong>in</strong>neba (UEW) <strong>in</strong> implement<strong>in</strong>g educational<br />

technologies under <strong>the</strong> Partnership for <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong> <strong>in</strong> Africa (<strong>PHEA</strong>) <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiative<br />

(ETI) as a way <strong>of</strong> address<strong>in</strong>g some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> aforementioned challenges, with a view to enhanc<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> quality <strong>of</strong><br />

teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g. The <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI <strong>in</strong>volved implement<strong>in</strong>g educational technologies with support from <strong>the</strong><br />

South African Institute for Distance <strong>Education</strong> (Saide). This case study report expla<strong>in</strong>s <strong>the</strong> processes that were<br />

followed <strong>in</strong> deploy<strong>in</strong>g pilot courses on Moodle, <strong>the</strong> challenges that were faced, and lessons drawn from <strong>the</strong><br />

experience.<br />

BACKGROUND TO THE PROJECT<br />

The University <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong>, W<strong>in</strong>neba is a multi-campus teacher education <strong>in</strong>stitution <strong>in</strong> Ghana. It has six<br />

residential campuses, three <strong>of</strong> which (North, South and Central campuses) are located <strong>in</strong> W<strong>in</strong>neba, and <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r<br />

three <strong>in</strong> Kumasi, Ashanti Mampong and Ajumako respectively, all <strong>in</strong> Ghana. The total student population is<br />

currently 50,012: 23,746 distance education students; 8,636 ‘sandwich’/part-time students; and 17,630 regular<br />

on-campus students. 1 The university also runs <strong>the</strong> largest distance education programme <strong>in</strong> Ghana, with 23 learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />

centres located <strong>in</strong> all ten <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> geographic regions. The university has eight faculties, two schools and an <strong>in</strong>stitute.<br />

A recent survey (2010/11 academic year) on selected courses at <strong>the</strong> university showed that class sizes range from 150<br />

to over 400 students <strong>in</strong> languages, physical education and social studies/science. For <strong>in</strong>stance, enrolment for <strong>the</strong><br />

GPD 113 course (an <strong>ICT</strong> course) is over 3,000 each year. Most UEW academics use teacher-centred <strong>in</strong>structional<br />

delivery strategies such as lecture expositions, which have not been effective <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> development <strong>of</strong> critical th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g,<br />

reflective th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g and problem-solv<strong>in</strong>g skills. This approach is also not effective <strong>in</strong> deal<strong>in</strong>g with large classes. The<br />

university’s distance education programme has also relied ma<strong>in</strong>ly on pr<strong>in</strong>ted textbooks and monthly meet<strong>in</strong>gs with<br />

tutors for delivery <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>struction and remediation. This does not adequately engage students <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir <strong>in</strong>teraction<br />

with <strong>in</strong>structors, with course content or with one ano<strong>the</strong>r.<br />

In l<strong>in</strong>e with <strong>the</strong> university’s <strong>ICT</strong> Strategic Plan (2003–2008), which sought to encourage <strong>the</strong> uptake <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>formation<br />

and communication technologies (<strong>ICT</strong>s) by improv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>frastructure on campus, a number <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>itiatives had been<br />

<strong>in</strong>troduced at <strong>the</strong> university prior to <strong>the</strong> <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI project. S<strong>in</strong>ce <strong>the</strong> 2003/04 academic year, <strong>the</strong> university<br />

has attempted to raise <strong>the</strong> awareness <strong>of</strong> academics about <strong>the</strong> importance <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> pedagogical <strong>in</strong>tegration <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong>s.<br />

For <strong>in</strong>stance, dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> period 2003–2005 <strong>the</strong> university benefited from <strong>the</strong> services <strong>of</strong> an American Fulbright<br />

Scholar (<strong>the</strong> late Pr<strong>of</strong>essor Emeritas Sandra Vogel Turner), who helped academics to develop basic technological<br />

competencies and use <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> for teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g (use <strong>of</strong> multimedia tools, PowerPo<strong>in</strong>t and word process<strong>in</strong>g)<br />

through a series <strong>of</strong> workshops and demonstration sessions. Dur<strong>in</strong>g this prelim<strong>in</strong>ary stage <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> educational<br />

technology <strong>in</strong>itiative, academics were assisted <strong>in</strong> purchas<strong>in</strong>g personal computers on hire-purchase agreements with<br />

local <strong>ICT</strong> vendors. Academic departments were also encouraged to set up departmental computer laboratories.<br />

The purpose was to <strong>in</strong>crease access to comput<strong>in</strong>g facilities by academics and students for teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

However, <strong>the</strong>se mass workshops failed to address discipl<strong>in</strong>e-specific educational technology needs and pedagogical<br />

<strong>in</strong>tegration <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong>. The consequence <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se shortcom<strong>in</strong>gs is that academics relapsed <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir use <strong>of</strong> educational<br />

technology after <strong>the</strong> tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g workshops. Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore, subsequent to August 2005, when Pr<strong>of</strong>essor Turner<br />

1 Institutional data provided by <strong>the</strong> UEW Publication Unit, 2011.<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

59


Us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> Moodle Learn<strong>in</strong>g Management System for Teach<strong>in</strong>g and<br />

Learn<strong>in</strong>g at <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong>, W<strong>in</strong>neba<br />

completed her UEW tour, <strong>the</strong>re were no follow-up workshops to address academics’ educational technology<br />

needs and concerns.<br />

In <strong>the</strong> past, UEW had also been assisted <strong>in</strong> mount<strong>in</strong>g three courses for onl<strong>in</strong>e delivery on <strong>the</strong> Moodle learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />

management system. These courses were developed externally by a South African organization, eDegree. Lecturers<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> university were not <strong>in</strong>volved <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> design and development <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se courses, however, and were only <strong>in</strong>volved<br />

<strong>in</strong> facilitat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> courses after <strong>the</strong>ir development. The dist<strong>in</strong>guish<strong>in</strong>g features <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> courses were <strong>the</strong>ir pac<strong>in</strong>g,<br />

assessment, and <strong>in</strong>teractive nature; students learned at <strong>the</strong>ir own pace, had immediate feedback on exercises <strong>the</strong>y<br />

completed, and could collaborate with one ano<strong>the</strong>r us<strong>in</strong>g blogs and forums. An evaluation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> Moodle <strong>in</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong>se courses was conducted after <strong>the</strong> semester, through questionnaire adm<strong>in</strong>istration to <strong>the</strong> 21 student participants<br />

who submitted <strong>the</strong>mselves for <strong>the</strong> end-<strong>of</strong>-semester exam<strong>in</strong>ation. The 21 students consisted <strong>of</strong> 17 second-year<br />

students and four first-year students. The f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs <strong>of</strong> this evaluation revealed that:<br />

• While facilitators did post assignments and use <strong>the</strong> discussion boards, <strong>the</strong>y did not appropriately respond to<br />

student challenges and queries;<br />

• Academics did not feel a part <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> process (i.e. <strong>the</strong>y did not own <strong>the</strong> design and delivery process <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

courses);<br />

• Facilitators found <strong>the</strong> technology challeng<strong>in</strong>g, despite <strong>the</strong>ir self-pr<strong>of</strong>essed confidence with technology <strong>in</strong> a<br />

survey <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>terested academics that was conducted to assess <strong>the</strong>ir competence <strong>in</strong> technology prior to course<br />

delivery on Moodle; and<br />

• eDegree hosted <strong>the</strong> Moodle server <strong>in</strong> South Africa; <strong>the</strong>refore, technical support was not readily available at<br />

UEW. This also meant that capacity was not built with<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitution.<br />

These f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs <strong>in</strong>dicate that one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> challenges with regard to <strong>the</strong> eDegree <strong>in</strong>tervention at UEW has to do with<br />

<strong>the</strong> extent to which academics <strong>in</strong>volved were outsiders to <strong>the</strong> process <strong>of</strong> design and development, and were only<br />

<strong>in</strong>volved <strong>in</strong> implement<strong>in</strong>g what an external designer had developed. In this sense, <strong>the</strong> academics did not exercise<br />

agency – <strong>the</strong>ir ownership <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> project was limited because <strong>the</strong>y were not part <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> design and development<br />

process.<br />

Previous attempts by <strong>the</strong> university to equip academics with expertise <strong>in</strong> <strong>ICT</strong>s to support teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />

were not successful. This was ma<strong>in</strong>ly due to <strong>the</strong> ad hoc nature <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>terventions, lack <strong>of</strong> local expertise<br />

and poor <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong>frastructure on campus. The <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI project <strong>the</strong>refore came <strong>in</strong> at an opportune time, <strong>of</strong>fer<strong>in</strong>g<br />

<strong>the</strong> university <strong>the</strong> opportunity to address poor uptake <strong>of</strong> educational technologies <strong>in</strong> teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

CHALLENGES TO BE ADDRESSED BY THE PROJECT<br />

Prior to <strong>the</strong> implementation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI, <strong>the</strong> learn<strong>in</strong>g environment <strong>of</strong> UEW was characterized by:<br />

• Overcrowd<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> lecture rooms, which adversely affected <strong>the</strong> quality <strong>of</strong> teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g;<br />

• Teacher-centred pedagogical practices and <strong>in</strong>structional academic strategies, which do not adequately address<br />

diversity <strong>of</strong> learn<strong>in</strong>g styles/needs;<br />

• Overload on <strong>the</strong> part <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>structors, which made it difficult for <strong>the</strong>m to <strong>in</strong>novate and create enabl<strong>in</strong>g learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />

experiences for students; and<br />

• The <strong>in</strong>ability <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> majority <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> academics to use <strong>the</strong> available educational technology resources.<br />

The <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI at UEW was designed to address some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se shortcom<strong>in</strong>gs <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitution’s teach<strong>in</strong>g and<br />

learn<strong>in</strong>g environment. By support<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> educational technology <strong>in</strong> teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g, <strong>the</strong> <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI<br />

aimed to improve <strong>in</strong>teractions between student and <strong>in</strong>structor, between student and content, and among <strong>the</strong><br />

students. In plann<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> implementation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI, <strong>the</strong> over-rid<strong>in</strong>g goals <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> university’s <strong>Education</strong>al<br />

60<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


Us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> Moodle Learn<strong>in</strong>g Management System for Teach<strong>in</strong>g and<br />

Learn<strong>in</strong>g at <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong>, W<strong>in</strong>neba<br />

Technology Strategy were to:<br />

• Address <strong>the</strong> challenges posed by large class sizes and <strong>in</strong>adequate teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g facilities through <strong>the</strong><br />

adoption <strong>of</strong>: hybrid <strong>in</strong>structional delivery modes for residential programmes; onl<strong>in</strong>e learn<strong>in</strong>g strategies for<br />

distance education students; and pedagogical practices and <strong>in</strong>structional strategies that would meet <strong>the</strong> diverse<br />

learn<strong>in</strong>g needs and styles <strong>of</strong> 21st century students; and<br />

• Make optimal use <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> to enhance management <strong>in</strong>formation systems.<br />

The <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI plan was to assist <strong>the</strong> UEW <strong>in</strong> achiev<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>se goals by support<strong>in</strong>g three <strong>in</strong>terventions at <strong>the</strong><br />

<strong>in</strong>stitution: (i) a basel<strong>in</strong>e study on <strong>the</strong> status <strong>of</strong> educational technology at UEW; (ii) <strong>the</strong> development and<br />

deployment <strong>of</strong> hybrid courses on <strong>the</strong> Moodle learn<strong>in</strong>g management system (LMS); and (iii) an <strong>in</strong>vestigation <strong>in</strong>to<br />

how academics and students use Moodle for teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g. The Moodle LMS project was conceived as<br />

part <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> strategy to help build <strong>the</strong> capacities <strong>of</strong> academics and students to purposefully use <strong>ICT</strong>s for teach<strong>in</strong>g<br />

and learn<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

The current case study focuses on <strong>the</strong> second <strong>in</strong>tervention (‘Project 2’), <strong>in</strong>volv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> development and deployment<br />

<strong>of</strong> courses on Moodle. The specific objectives <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> second <strong>in</strong>tervention were to deploy Moodle <strong>in</strong> order to augment<br />

face-to-face <strong>in</strong>struction and to enhance <strong>the</strong> quality <strong>of</strong> purely onl<strong>in</strong>e support for distance education students.<br />

The ma<strong>in</strong> research question that guided this <strong>in</strong>vestigation was: How does <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> Moodle impact academics’<br />

pedagogical practices and students’ experiences <strong>of</strong> learn<strong>in</strong>g and assessment?<br />

LITERATURE REVIEW<br />

Onl<strong>in</strong>e learn<strong>in</strong>g and course/learn<strong>in</strong>g management systems<br />

An LMS, which can also be referred to as a course management system, is s<strong>of</strong>tware that automates <strong>the</strong> adm<strong>in</strong>istrative<br />

tasks <strong>of</strong> education/tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g, such as register<strong>in</strong>g users, track<strong>in</strong>g courses <strong>in</strong> a catalogue, record<strong>in</strong>g data, chart<strong>in</strong>g a<br />

user’s progress toward certification, and provid<strong>in</strong>g reports to managers. Such systems also serve as a platform<br />

for deliver<strong>in</strong>g e-learn<strong>in</strong>g to students (Left Bra<strong>in</strong> Media, 2010/11). Hall (2004) states that <strong>the</strong> LMS ultimately<br />

provides an <strong>in</strong>terface that automates <strong>the</strong> adm<strong>in</strong>istration and facilitation <strong>of</strong> onl<strong>in</strong>e <strong>in</strong>teractions and <strong>the</strong> distribution<br />

<strong>of</strong> learn<strong>in</strong>g materials. In o<strong>the</strong>r words, when used effectively an LMS can help <strong>in</strong>structors provide <strong>the</strong>ir students<br />

with learn<strong>in</strong>g materials and <strong>in</strong>structional activities, while keep<strong>in</strong>g track <strong>of</strong> student participation and progress<br />

through data management systems and assessment modules. Ullman and Rab<strong>in</strong>owitz (2004) propose that LMSs<br />

are becom<strong>in</strong>g critical to education, be<strong>in</strong>g used ma<strong>in</strong>ly to supplement <strong>the</strong> traditional learn<strong>in</strong>g experience <strong>in</strong> a course<br />

and to organize <strong>the</strong> course experience.<br />

LMSs are available <strong>in</strong> two forms: proprietary/closed source and open source. Open source s<strong>of</strong>tware (OSS) can<br />

be def<strong>in</strong>ed as s<strong>of</strong>tware distributed under a licens<strong>in</strong>g agreement that allows <strong>the</strong> source code (computer code) to be<br />

shared, viewed and modified by o<strong>the</strong>r users and organizations (coreDNA, 2009). Some examples <strong>of</strong> open source<br />

learn<strong>in</strong>g management systems are Manhattan Virtual Classroom, Moodle and Sakai (coreDNA, 2009).<br />

Closed source s<strong>of</strong>tware is proprietary s<strong>of</strong>tware that is distributed under a licens<strong>in</strong>g agreement to authorized users<br />

with private modification, copy<strong>in</strong>g and republish<strong>in</strong>g restrictions (coreDNA, 2009). The cost <strong>of</strong> proprietary s<strong>of</strong>tware<br />

usually varies from thousands to hundreds <strong>of</strong> thousands <strong>of</strong> dollars, depend<strong>in</strong>g on <strong>the</strong> complexity <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> s<strong>of</strong>tware<br />

and o<strong>the</strong>r customizations or services that come with it. Proprietary s<strong>of</strong>tware providers do not allow users to alter<br />

or view <strong>the</strong> source code <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir s<strong>of</strong>tware products. Examples <strong>of</strong> closed source/proprietary course management<br />

systems are Blackboard, WebCT, Desire2Learn and Joomla LMS (coreDNA, 2009).<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

61


Us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> Moodle Learn<strong>in</strong>g Management System for Teach<strong>in</strong>g and<br />

Learn<strong>in</strong>g at <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong>, W<strong>in</strong>neba<br />

Horton (2000) states that LMSs can be used <strong>in</strong> one <strong>of</strong> three scenarios: <strong>in</strong> a completely onl<strong>in</strong>e environment without<br />

any physical face-to-face <strong>in</strong>teraction; <strong>in</strong> a hybrid course environment where <strong>the</strong> class frequently meets face-to-face<br />

as well as conduct<strong>in</strong>g onl<strong>in</strong>e meet<strong>in</strong>gs and activities; and <strong>in</strong> a face-to-face course environment with <strong>the</strong> provision<br />

<strong>of</strong> web-based support materials and activities. UEW currently uses <strong>the</strong> hybrid or blended model, s<strong>in</strong>ce academics<br />

have <strong>in</strong>adequate capacity for effective facilitation <strong>of</strong> full onl<strong>in</strong>e courses, and <strong>the</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong>frastructures/facilities,<br />

particularly Internet connectivity, are not yet developed sufficiently to support exclusive onl<strong>in</strong>e course delivery.<br />

The adoption <strong>of</strong> LMSs for web-based <strong>in</strong>struction cont<strong>in</strong>ues to <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> today’s higher education <strong>in</strong>stitutions<br />

(Vovides, Sanchez-Alonso, Mitropoulou, & Nickmans, 2007) and studies have shown that students have a positive<br />

perception <strong>of</strong> LMSs. A study by Erah and Dairo (2008) to evaluate pharmacy students’ perception <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> application<br />

<strong>of</strong> an LMS <strong>in</strong> a doctor <strong>of</strong> pharmacy programme at <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> Ben<strong>in</strong>, Nigeria, revealed that over 92% <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> students sampled felt that <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> an LMS will make teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g more excit<strong>in</strong>g and effective,<br />

especially when comb<strong>in</strong>ed with face-to-face teach<strong>in</strong>g. The study also concluded that <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> an LMS would<br />

improve <strong>the</strong> learn<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> pharmacy students, as <strong>the</strong> LMS enables students to collaborate onl<strong>in</strong>e. A 2012 study by<br />

Zhu on student satisfaction, performance, and knowledge construction <strong>in</strong> onl<strong>in</strong>e collaborative learn<strong>in</strong>g concluded:<br />

Learn<strong>in</strong>g with peers may benefit not only <strong>the</strong> overall <strong>in</strong>dividual performance; it may also enhance team performance<br />

by <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> quality <strong>of</strong> team product. Students can learn to formulate ideas and op<strong>in</strong>ions more effectively<br />

through group discussions. Based on social constructivism and activity <strong>the</strong>ory, <strong>the</strong> onl<strong>in</strong>e learn<strong>in</strong>g system can<br />

enrich collaborative learn<strong>in</strong>g activities for knowledge construction. Results <strong>of</strong> this study confirm that onl<strong>in</strong>e<br />

learn<strong>in</strong>g systems can enrich students’ collaborative learn<strong>in</strong>g activities and <strong>the</strong>ir knowledge construction via group<br />

<strong>in</strong>teraction. (2012: 134)<br />

Liaw (2004) makes <strong>the</strong> same observations <strong>in</strong> an earlier study and adds that web-based systems, cross-platform<br />

environments, hyperl<strong>in</strong>ked networks and synchronous or/and asynchronous communication are all appropriate<br />

functions that provide students with more equal opportunities for retriev<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>formation and active <strong>in</strong>teraction<br />

with o<strong>the</strong>r students and teachers.<br />

A study by Greyl<strong>in</strong>g, Kara, Makka, and Van Niekerk (2008), which reported on teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g and<br />

assessment strategies for classes made up <strong>of</strong> approximately 600 first-year students <strong>in</strong> bus<strong>in</strong>ess management at <strong>the</strong><br />

University <strong>of</strong> South Africa, concluded that <strong>the</strong> blended learn<strong>in</strong>g strategy resulted <strong>in</strong> enhanced student perceptions<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> quality <strong>of</strong> teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g and a significant improvement <strong>in</strong> student throughput. This conclusion<br />

confirmed an earlier study by Bongey, Cizadlo, and Kalnbach (2005), which found that ‘<strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se expertsystem-like<br />

self-tests, grade books, and o<strong>the</strong>r LMS features has <strong>the</strong> potential to improve teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />

<strong>in</strong> all manner <strong>of</strong> courses, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g those that are on-ground, blended, and fully onl<strong>in</strong>e’ (2005: 252). Zhang,<br />

Zhao, Zhou, and Numamaker’s (2004) f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs support this <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir assertion that students on blended learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />

courses can be more engaged as <strong>the</strong>y can move at <strong>the</strong>ir own pace through <strong>the</strong> course materials, and determ<strong>in</strong>e<br />

<strong>the</strong>ir personal needs.<br />

Accord<strong>in</strong>g to Morgan (2003), <strong>the</strong> EDUCAUSE Centre for Applied Research studied <strong>the</strong> faculty use <strong>of</strong> LMSs <strong>in</strong><br />

2003, <strong>the</strong> extent and purpose <strong>of</strong> use – <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> factors on which <strong>in</strong>structors’ decisions to use an LMS were<br />

based – and whe<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> LMS resulted <strong>in</strong> ‘pedagogical ga<strong>in</strong>s’. The study results show that use <strong>of</strong> LMSs<br />

is <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g at a rapid rate. It is remarkable however that <strong>the</strong> use is not focused on <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>teractive features <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

LMS but on <strong>the</strong> content creation tools (Morgan, 2003). The study results also <strong>in</strong>dicated that although <strong>in</strong>structors<br />

claimed <strong>the</strong>y had adopted <strong>the</strong> LMS <strong>in</strong> order to meet pedagogical needs, <strong>the</strong> actual use <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> system seemed to be<br />

<strong>in</strong> meet<strong>in</strong>g class management needs.<br />

62<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


Us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> Moodle Learn<strong>in</strong>g Management System for Teach<strong>in</strong>g and<br />

Learn<strong>in</strong>g at <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong>, W<strong>in</strong>neba<br />

A 2010 survey by Unw<strong>in</strong> et al., based on 358 respondents across 25 African countries, explored LMS usage and<br />

reported familiarity with LMSs. In total, 174 respondents (49% <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> total sample) affirmed <strong>the</strong>y had used an<br />

LMS for teach<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> previous twelve months and 185 (52% <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> total sample) had used one for learn<strong>in</strong>g. In<br />

that study two LMS environments dom<strong>in</strong>ated: Blackboard and Moodle.<br />

It is worth not<strong>in</strong>g that even though <strong>the</strong> World Wide Web (www) conta<strong>in</strong>s a vast amount <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>formation and<br />

countless resources, <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>efficient use <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se resources can be a major limit<strong>in</strong>g factor to <strong>in</strong>structors who are<br />

unfamiliar with how to use <strong>the</strong>m. What this means is that courses modelled to be delivered onl<strong>in</strong>e should <strong>in</strong>clude<br />

a lesson on effective use <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> www to enable students to use web-based platforms effectively and optimally. That<br />

said, <strong>the</strong> delivery <strong>of</strong> onl<strong>in</strong>e courses is for <strong>the</strong> most part enhanced by <strong>the</strong> advent <strong>of</strong> LMSs.<br />

The UEW is thus fortunate to have had <strong>the</strong> <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI project, which has not only supported <strong>the</strong> acquisition <strong>of</strong><br />

a dedicated server for <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stallation <strong>of</strong> Moodle but has also <strong>in</strong>cluded tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g academics <strong>in</strong> onl<strong>in</strong>e courseware<br />

deployment and delivery on <strong>the</strong> LMS.<br />

Us<strong>in</strong>g Moodle as an <strong>in</strong>structional tool<br />

While traditional teach<strong>in</strong>g environments have tended to be teacher-centred, <strong>the</strong>re are some recognized advantages<br />

that blended learn<strong>in</strong>g or hybrid learn<strong>in</strong>g has over traditional, face-to-face learn<strong>in</strong>g. Blended <strong>in</strong>struction caters<br />

to a range <strong>of</strong> different learn<strong>in</strong>g styles and ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong>s quality lecturer–student <strong>in</strong>teraction <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> classroom at <strong>the</strong><br />

same time (Dukes, War<strong>in</strong>g, & Koorland, 2006). When <strong>in</strong>structors replace <strong>in</strong>-class time with onl<strong>in</strong>e components<br />

– such as upload<strong>in</strong>g read<strong>in</strong>g materials for students to download and engage with prior to class, and discussion<br />

forums, quizzes and so on – it frees up time for <strong>the</strong> lecturer to address students’ learn<strong>in</strong>g problems or areas that<br />

students may f<strong>in</strong>d particularly confus<strong>in</strong>g. For example, <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> case <strong>of</strong> UEW where large class sizes are a norm, it<br />

gives students <strong>the</strong> chance to <strong>in</strong>teract on a personal basis with <strong>the</strong> content, resources, activities and assessments,<br />

and it gives <strong>the</strong> lecturer <strong>the</strong> time and opportunity to address particular learn<strong>in</strong>g problems or areas <strong>of</strong> confusion<br />

for students. Also, <strong>in</strong> courses that <strong>of</strong>fer practical experiences or hands-on practice, a hybrid approach frees up class<br />

time for <strong>the</strong> lecturer to provide hands-on <strong>in</strong>struction and demonstrations.<br />

METHODOLOGY<br />

Research design<br />

The current study adopted a qualitative approach to evaluat<strong>in</strong>g and document<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> processes and activities carried<br />

out <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> UEW <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI to develop and deploy hybrid courses on <strong>the</strong> Moodle LMS. A qualitative approach<br />

was identified as be<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> most suitable for ga<strong>the</strong>r<strong>in</strong>g data from <strong>the</strong> social environment <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> university. The<br />

op<strong>in</strong>ions and views <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> various actors were analysed <strong>in</strong> order to frame <strong>the</strong> issues and formulate emerg<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>mes<br />

(Owen & Demb, 2004).The current case study is thus an evaluative one, seek<strong>in</strong>g to <strong>in</strong>vestigate how academics<br />

and students used <strong>the</strong> Moodle LMS to enhance teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g at <strong>the</strong> university. The evaluation used a<br />

number <strong>of</strong> qualitative <strong>in</strong>struments and strategies, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g documentation <strong>of</strong> processes and activities, observation<br />

<strong>of</strong> academics’ and students’ use <strong>of</strong> Moodle, and <strong>in</strong>terviews and focus group discussions. Accord<strong>in</strong>g to Owen and<br />

Demb (2004),<br />

a research strategy based on <strong>in</strong>dividual <strong>in</strong>terviews and focus group discussions allows for <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>clusion <strong>of</strong> a broad<br />

range <strong>of</strong> perspectives from a variety <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>dividuals who [are] <strong>in</strong>timately immersed <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>novative changes on<br />

campus as developers, implementers, and/or end users. (2004: 640)<br />

Sample description<br />

Two <strong>ICT</strong> lecturers were <strong>the</strong> ma<strong>in</strong> participants <strong>in</strong> this qualitative study. Initially, <strong>the</strong>re were two ma<strong>in</strong> considerations<br />

that <strong>in</strong>formed <strong>the</strong>ir selection. The first reason for us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>se particular academics <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> research was that <strong>the</strong>y were<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

63


Us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> Moodle Learn<strong>in</strong>g Management System for Teach<strong>in</strong>g and<br />

Learn<strong>in</strong>g at <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong>, W<strong>in</strong>neba<br />

already us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>ICT</strong> for pedagogical purposes and were <strong>the</strong>refore more <strong>in</strong>cl<strong>in</strong>ed to adopt Moodle at <strong>the</strong> pilot stage<br />

without much difficulty. The second reason was that <strong>the</strong>se academics were directly <strong>in</strong>volved <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> UEW <strong>PHEA</strong><br />

ETI projects and were responsible for tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g and assist<strong>in</strong>g o<strong>the</strong>r academics <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> development and deployment<br />

<strong>of</strong> courseware on Moodle. The research team for this study <strong>in</strong>cluded two o<strong>the</strong>r senior academics as researchers and<br />

two research assistants, who were chosen because <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir expertise <strong>in</strong> educational and <strong>in</strong>structional technology<br />

and research. Their responsibility was to assist <strong>the</strong> ma<strong>in</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> lecturers to conduct <strong>the</strong> evaluative research.<br />

Two sets <strong>of</strong> students consist<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> six members each participated <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> student focus group discussions. They were<br />

chosen by virtue <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir participation <strong>in</strong> courses run on Moodle under <strong>the</strong> <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI. Focus group discussion<br />

was preferred over self-completed surveys because <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> Moodle was not yet widely experienced at UEW and<br />

because <strong>the</strong> researchers wanted to delve deeply <strong>in</strong>to participants’ experiences with Moodle <strong>in</strong> order to ga<strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>sights<br />

<strong>in</strong>to how <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>tervention could be rolled out to <strong>the</strong> wider university academic programmes.<br />

Data collection<br />

The follow<strong>in</strong>g data collection methods were used:<br />

• The two lecturers <strong>in</strong>volved <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> research kept reflective journals on all <strong>the</strong> processes that were carried out<br />

towards <strong>the</strong> implementation <strong>of</strong> Moodle. Journal <strong>in</strong>put <strong>in</strong>cluded classroom practice, <strong>the</strong> courseware development<br />

process, and engagement with Moodle dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> implementation stages. These journals documented lectures’<br />

experiences work<strong>in</strong>g with o<strong>the</strong>r academics and <strong>in</strong> Moodle;<br />

• Moodle user logs for each <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> two courses provided evidence <strong>of</strong> how academics and students used <strong>the</strong><br />

Moodle platform for teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g. Data obta<strong>in</strong>ed from <strong>the</strong> logs <strong>in</strong>cluded frequency <strong>of</strong> use, <strong>the</strong> type<br />

<strong>of</strong> activity, and students’ <strong>in</strong>teractions with facilitators as well as peers on Moodle. These logs also provided<br />

useful <strong>in</strong>formation about students’ reflections on <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>fluence <strong>of</strong> Moodle on <strong>the</strong>ir learn<strong>in</strong>g;<br />

• Focus groups with selected students <strong>of</strong>fered an opportunity to obta<strong>in</strong> qualitative data from students about a range<br />

<strong>of</strong> issues concern<strong>in</strong>g how <strong>the</strong>ir use <strong>of</strong> Moodle impacted on <strong>the</strong>ir learn<strong>in</strong>g experiences; and<br />

• Focus groups with selected <strong>in</strong>structors who had previously implemented educational technologies <strong>of</strong>fered <strong>the</strong><br />

researchers an opportunity to obta<strong>in</strong> qualitative data from <strong>the</strong>ir peers about a range <strong>of</strong> issues concern<strong>in</strong>g<br />

how <strong>the</strong>ir use <strong>of</strong> Moodle impacted on <strong>the</strong>ir <strong>in</strong>structional experiences us<strong>in</strong>g a hybrid mode <strong>of</strong> delivery. These<br />

discussions with colleagues helped <strong>the</strong> participat<strong>in</strong>g academics to undertake self-reflections on what worked<br />

and did not work dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> Moodle implementation. These also provided useful <strong>in</strong>sights <strong>in</strong>to <strong>the</strong> challenges<br />

and prospects <strong>of</strong> roll<strong>in</strong>g out this <strong>in</strong>tervention across all academic programmes <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> university.<br />

RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION<br />

Data from <strong>the</strong> processes and sources outl<strong>in</strong>ed above were analysed and <strong>the</strong> f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs are presented and discussed<br />

below.<br />

Background <strong>in</strong>formation on <strong>the</strong> observation <strong>of</strong> academics’ and students’ use <strong>of</strong> Moodle<br />

The UEW Moodle site was set up and configured at <strong>the</strong> Network Operations Centre (NOC) by <strong>the</strong> university’s<br />

network adm<strong>in</strong>istrator with help from facilitators from Saide (from South Africa). The GPD 113 (‘Introduction<br />

to <strong>ICT</strong>’) course was run on a pilot basis dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> second semester <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> 2010/11 academic year. The EDI 502<br />

course (‘Computer Applications <strong>in</strong> <strong>Education</strong>’) was piloted <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> 2011 sandwich session (June to August). Users<br />

(faculty and students) were registered by <strong>the</strong> NOC system, us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong>ficial UEW network accounts. On 21 February<br />

2011 a hybrid mode <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> onl<strong>in</strong>e learn<strong>in</strong>g environment us<strong>in</strong>g Moodle was set up to supplement face-to-face<br />

lectures and practical classes. Students accessed Moodle content from March to July 2012 us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>ir UEW <strong>of</strong>ficial<br />

password-protected user accounts.<br />

64<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


Us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> Moodle Learn<strong>in</strong>g Management System for Teach<strong>in</strong>g and<br />

Learn<strong>in</strong>g at <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong>, W<strong>in</strong>neba<br />

The central issues <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>terest on <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> Moodle were explored accord<strong>in</strong>g to <strong>the</strong> follow<strong>in</strong>g broad questions:<br />

• Does <strong>the</strong> curricular revision adequately <strong>in</strong>clude Moodle use by students?<br />

• How was Moodle <strong>in</strong>troduced to students?<br />

• How did students participate <strong>in</strong> class us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> Moodle platform?<br />

• What k<strong>in</strong>ds <strong>of</strong> activity are carried out on Moodle by (a) <strong>in</strong>structors and (b) students?<br />

• What k<strong>in</strong>ds <strong>of</strong> issues do students br<strong>in</strong>g to face-to-face class discussions?<br />

• What is <strong>the</strong> quality <strong>of</strong> Moodle lesson presentation?<br />

A checklist was designed for observ<strong>in</strong>g and monitor<strong>in</strong>g activities be<strong>in</strong>g carried out by <strong>in</strong>structors and students<br />

on <strong>the</strong> UEW Moodle LMS <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> EDI 502 and GPD 113 (‘Introduction to <strong>ICT</strong>’) courses. The strategy was<br />

to compare <strong>in</strong>structors’ and students’ use <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> features <strong>of</strong> Moodle <strong>in</strong> both phases with a view to observ<strong>in</strong>g<br />

improvement <strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>structional practices and quality <strong>of</strong> learn<strong>in</strong>g. The logs showed that some students cont<strong>in</strong>ued to<br />

visit <strong>the</strong> course site after <strong>the</strong> semester had ended.<br />

Moodle environment lesson observation<br />

The Moodle design follows <strong>the</strong> standard Moodle features layout, though <strong>in</strong> Phase 2 a few more features – such as<br />

a survey to evaluate <strong>the</strong> course, navigation pane for easy movement across <strong>the</strong> course, and academic and technical<br />

support <strong>in</strong>formation – were added, and <strong>in</strong>formation on how students would get feedback was given. In Phase 2,<br />

improvements were also made <strong>in</strong> consistency <strong>of</strong> course layout <strong>in</strong> terms <strong>of</strong> font type, colour, and use <strong>of</strong> labels and<br />

pictures. The modules used by <strong>in</strong>structors <strong>in</strong>cluded resources, assignments, chats, quizzes, forums, wikis, surveys,<br />

glossaries, journals, and choices. The expected activities under each feature as outl<strong>in</strong>ed <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>-house Moodle<br />

user manual were matched aga<strong>in</strong>st actual activities carried out on Moodle dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> implementation period. The<br />

closer <strong>the</strong>se two sets <strong>of</strong> activities were, <strong>the</strong> more optimal <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se features, and vice versa.<br />

Lecturers revised <strong>the</strong> curricula to <strong>in</strong>clude Moodle use and dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> first lesson <strong>in</strong>structors demonstrated to<br />

students how to log<strong>in</strong> and update <strong>the</strong>ir user pr<strong>of</strong>iles. Instructors also expla<strong>in</strong>ed <strong>the</strong> track<strong>in</strong>g features <strong>of</strong> Moodle<br />

that would be used to monitor students’ onl<strong>in</strong>e activities. This was done <strong>in</strong> both Phases 1 and 2 <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Moodle<br />

implementation.<br />

Good practices <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>structors <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> first round <strong>of</strong> implementation <strong>of</strong> Moodle<br />

The follow<strong>in</strong>g were good practices observed dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> Phase 1 implementation <strong>of</strong> Project 2:<br />

• Moodle content file sizes were not large; <strong>the</strong>y were kept small for easy upload<strong>in</strong>g and download<strong>in</strong>g;<br />

• Documents were well labelled;<br />

• Students were encouraged to save work dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>ir work onl<strong>in</strong>e e.g. dur<strong>in</strong>g post<strong>in</strong>gs on forums, journals etc.;<br />

• Discussions dur<strong>in</strong>g face-to-face and onl<strong>in</strong>e sessions were dom<strong>in</strong>ated by students, while <strong>in</strong>structors guided and<br />

facilitated <strong>the</strong>m;<br />

• A variety <strong>of</strong> read<strong>in</strong>g resources was provided onl<strong>in</strong>e for <strong>the</strong> students; and<br />

• Students were encouraged to keep journals <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir learn<strong>in</strong>g experiences and br<strong>in</strong>g issues to class for discussion.<br />

Resources used on Moodle<br />

For content delivery <strong>the</strong> lecturers used <strong>the</strong> follow<strong>in</strong>g:<br />

• Text labels;<br />

• File uploads compris<strong>in</strong>g:<br />

◦◦<br />

PowerPo<strong>in</strong>t presentations for lessons;<br />

◦◦<br />

PDF files <strong>of</strong> relevant read<strong>in</strong>g material; and<br />

◦◦<br />

Micros<strong>of</strong>t Word documents <strong>of</strong> lecture notes.<br />

• L<strong>in</strong>ks to external resources on <strong>the</strong> web.<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

65


Us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> Moodle Learn<strong>in</strong>g Management System for Teach<strong>in</strong>g and<br />

Learn<strong>in</strong>g at <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong>, W<strong>in</strong>neba<br />

The availability <strong>of</strong> resources supported <strong>in</strong>dependent learn<strong>in</strong>g by students and provided opportunities for <strong>the</strong>m<br />

to develop a sense <strong>of</strong> ownership <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> learn<strong>in</strong>g process. Students proactively <strong>in</strong>teracted with <strong>the</strong> content, and<br />

<strong>the</strong> resources <strong>in</strong>cluded onl<strong>in</strong>e text, videos, <strong>in</strong>teractive exercises such as quizzes, and assignments that provided<br />

<strong>in</strong>stant feedback. It was discovered that for <strong>the</strong> EDI 502 course <strong>the</strong> resources were not adequately aligned with <strong>the</strong><br />

curriculum content (computer applications <strong>in</strong> education). There was more emphasis on <strong>ICT</strong> and socio-economic<br />

development issues and learn<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>ories than on applications for <strong>ICT</strong>s <strong>in</strong> education. This anomaly was detected<br />

dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>ternal course review and addressed appropriately by l<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> <strong>the</strong>ories with pedagogical <strong>in</strong>tegration<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong>s. Activities were created to match learn<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>ories with technological tools and a set <strong>of</strong> learn<strong>in</strong>g tasks.<br />

Ensur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> quality <strong>of</strong> Moodle courses<br />

Produc<strong>in</strong>g quality courses has been <strong>the</strong> focus <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>PHEA</strong> programme at UEW. The tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g workshops on<br />

pedagogy, <strong>in</strong>structional design and <strong>the</strong> technical aspects <strong>of</strong> Moodle ensured that high quality courses were developed<br />

<strong>in</strong> Moodle. Saide also facilitated capacity-build<strong>in</strong>g workshops aimed at address<strong>in</strong>g quality and evaluation aspects<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> onl<strong>in</strong>e courses. Participants were <strong>in</strong>troduced to <strong>in</strong>structional design by first view<strong>in</strong>g a video titled The Big<br />

Mistake, which critiqued a range <strong>of</strong> e-learn<strong>in</strong>g courses. Thereafter <strong>the</strong> participants used a Moodle forum to share an<br />

evaluation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir own e-learn<strong>in</strong>g courses. Participants reviewed a ten-po<strong>in</strong>t <strong>in</strong>structional design checklist available<br />

on <strong>the</strong> Internet and <strong>the</strong>n use <strong>the</strong> Moodle journal tool to comment on <strong>the</strong> appropriateness <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> items identified.<br />

Work<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> pairs <strong>the</strong> participants used a number <strong>of</strong> sources to develop 15 criteria to assess e-learn<strong>in</strong>g courseware.<br />

Participants used <strong>the</strong>ir criteria sets to evaluate three external e-learn<strong>in</strong>g courses: Open University, BBC and Johns<br />

Hopk<strong>in</strong>s School <strong>of</strong> Public Health. The participants reported back on <strong>the</strong>ir experiences and various design issues<br />

were discussed. Participants <strong>the</strong>n used <strong>the</strong> same criteria to provide <strong>the</strong> facilitator with feedback on <strong>the</strong> Moodle<br />

course he had designed for <strong>the</strong> workshop.<br />

A general course evaluation checklist was developed based on syn<strong>the</strong>siz<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> various groups’ evaluation criteria<br />

prepared dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> workshop. The general course evaluation checklist was distributed to all courseware developers<br />

and courseware developers’ assistants to serve as a guide for courses be<strong>in</strong>g developed. The courseware assistants<br />

served as <strong>the</strong> first po<strong>in</strong>t <strong>of</strong> contact (as outl<strong>in</strong>ed <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir job descriptions); <strong>the</strong>y were expected to use a quality<br />

assurance checklist to formatively evaluate <strong>the</strong> quality <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> courses mounted on Moodle.<br />

The courseware was <strong>in</strong>ternally reviewed by a review team that was locally constituted. The team members’ comments<br />

were <strong>the</strong>n passed on to <strong>the</strong> courseware developers to address identified deficiencies and suggested changes to <strong>the</strong>ir<br />

courses. The identified deficiencies <strong>in</strong>cluded <strong>the</strong> follow<strong>in</strong>g:<br />

• Etiquette expectations: Authors were advised to <strong>in</strong>clude an item on etiquette <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir course manuals/outl<strong>in</strong>es.<br />

• Prerequisite knowledge: The courses needed to stipulate <strong>the</strong> prior knowledge required by students wish<strong>in</strong>g to<br />

do <strong>the</strong> course.<br />

• Course components: The courses had to provide <strong>in</strong>structions on how to f<strong>in</strong>d <strong>the</strong> course components; authors<br />

were required to <strong>in</strong>clude this as part <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>troduction to <strong>the</strong> navigation tool.<br />

• Technical skills expectation: Authors were advised to create a paragraph <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir course manuals/outl<strong>in</strong>es to<br />

<strong>in</strong>clude this expectation. The follow<strong>in</strong>g sample paragraph was provided: ‘Computer literacy is a required skill for<br />

this course. This <strong>in</strong>cludes user’s ability to go onl<strong>in</strong>e; use <strong>of</strong> an Internet browser; and experience with Moodle.’<br />

• A range <strong>of</strong> student support issues: There were two types <strong>of</strong> feedback: technical support and academic support.<br />

The technical support team (network adm<strong>in</strong>istrator and educational technologists) gave feedback on issues<br />

such as assist<strong>in</strong>g students with log-<strong>in</strong> problems, download<strong>in</strong>g resources, upload<strong>in</strong>g assignments and embedd<strong>in</strong>g<br />

multimedia resources <strong>in</strong> assignments. Academic feedback took <strong>the</strong> form <strong>of</strong> advice to <strong>in</strong>structors on us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong><br />

various Moodle tools, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g journals, forums, assignments and quizzes.<br />

66<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


Us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> Moodle Learn<strong>in</strong>g Management System for Teach<strong>in</strong>g and<br />

Learn<strong>in</strong>g at <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong>, W<strong>in</strong>neba<br />

Students also evaluated some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> courses, us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> Moodle survey tool to do a formal summative evaluation<br />

and giv<strong>in</strong>g feedback to lecturers for improved <strong>in</strong>structional delivery.<br />

In response to <strong>the</strong> feedback from <strong>the</strong> review team, <strong>the</strong> researchers <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> current case study developed a Moodle<br />

course structure and learn<strong>in</strong>g pathway that guided course developers. This helped considerably to standardize all<br />

courses mounted or be<strong>in</strong>g mounted on <strong>the</strong> Moodle platform.<br />

F<strong>in</strong>ally, as part <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> ongo<strong>in</strong>g evaluation process, a visit<strong>in</strong>g Saide Moodle facilitator undertook a prelim<strong>in</strong>ary<br />

external review <strong>of</strong> courses dur<strong>in</strong>g a workshop <strong>in</strong> April 2012. The facilitator noted that quite a number <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

courses under development had escaped <strong>the</strong> usual trap <strong>of</strong> poor pedagogy. He surmised that this was because UEW<br />

is, after all, a university <strong>of</strong> education.<br />

However, a shortcom<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> evaluation process observed by <strong>the</strong> researchers was that due to time constra<strong>in</strong>ts<br />

<strong>the</strong>re was no chance for peer review <strong>of</strong> courses before <strong>the</strong>y were deployed for use by <strong>the</strong> students. Although <strong>the</strong><br />

checklist used to evaluate <strong>the</strong> courses was extensive, peer review <strong>of</strong> courses would also have helped to verify <strong>the</strong><br />

accuracy <strong>of</strong> content, pedagogy and learn<strong>in</strong>g evaluation. Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore, course developers would have collaborated<br />

more effectively and had <strong>the</strong> opportunity to share <strong>the</strong>ir experiences and challenges. These observations will guide<br />

future roll out <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> ga<strong>in</strong>s <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI across all faculties <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> university.<br />

Communication and <strong>in</strong>teraction<br />

The Moodle collaborative tools (chats, forums and wikis) and self-paced activities such as <strong>the</strong> journal, quizzes and<br />

assignments were used to enhance <strong>in</strong>teraction between <strong>in</strong>structors and students, between students and <strong>the</strong> content,<br />

and among students. The discussion forums were based on contemporary issues related to <strong>the</strong> impact <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong><br />

on socio-economic development and learn<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>ories. In <strong>the</strong> first pilot, collaboration with<strong>in</strong> both courses was<br />

not very effective; students simply posted <strong>the</strong>ir views without read<strong>in</strong>g or respond<strong>in</strong>g to those <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir colleagues.<br />

Instructors failed to give clear <strong>in</strong>structions requir<strong>in</strong>g students not only to post <strong>the</strong>ir contributions but also to read<br />

<strong>the</strong>ir colleagues’ post<strong>in</strong>gs and respond to at least two <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>m. Students used <strong>the</strong>se collaborative tools as if <strong>the</strong>y<br />

were meant for <strong>in</strong>dividualized activities. Prelim<strong>in</strong>ary <strong>in</strong>vestigation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> first pilot identified this shortcom<strong>in</strong>g,<br />

which was corrected <strong>in</strong> Phase 2.<br />

In <strong>the</strong> Phase 2 implementation, lecturers used <strong>the</strong> discussion forum to promote social <strong>in</strong>teraction that got students<br />

to debate and react to issues. Lecturers put up questions/statements <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> discussion forum and students posted<br />

<strong>the</strong>ir thoughts or op<strong>in</strong>ions and commented on <strong>the</strong> post<strong>in</strong>gs or thoughts <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir classmates. Lecturers <strong>the</strong>n<br />

commented on <strong>the</strong> students’ replies. Comments by lecturers dur<strong>in</strong>g a focus group <strong>in</strong>terview support this po<strong>in</strong>t:<br />

I used <strong>the</strong> forum a lot. Because we would come to a stage <strong>in</strong> class dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> face-to-face discussion where <strong>the</strong>y<br />

would have to give <strong>the</strong>ir views on issues and comment on what <strong>the</strong>ir friends had also written.<br />

We did forums too where <strong>the</strong> students were able to comment on o<strong>the</strong>r students’ <strong>in</strong>put.<br />

I used <strong>the</strong> forums to talk about issues that I really want to pick <strong>the</strong>ir bra<strong>in</strong>s on.<br />

Lecturers used journals for <strong>in</strong>teraction on an <strong>in</strong>dividual level with <strong>the</strong> students. In <strong>the</strong>ir journals, students posted<br />

reflections about <strong>the</strong> lesson, <strong>the</strong> course and <strong>the</strong>ir learn<strong>in</strong>g, and <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>structors commented on <strong>the</strong> students’<br />

reflections without <strong>the</strong> comments be<strong>in</strong>g seen by o<strong>the</strong>r students. The follow<strong>in</strong>g comments <strong>of</strong> some lecturers<br />

corroborate this po<strong>in</strong>t:<br />

I used journals to get <strong>the</strong>ir [students’] feedback <strong>of</strong> what <strong>the</strong>y have studied or <strong>the</strong>ir expectations on an <strong>in</strong>dividual<br />

basis.<br />

I used journals for assess<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> students.<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

67


Us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> Moodle Learn<strong>in</strong>g Management System for Teach<strong>in</strong>g and<br />

Learn<strong>in</strong>g at <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong>, W<strong>in</strong>neba<br />

E-mails were ano<strong>the</strong>r feature used by <strong>in</strong>structors to communicate/<strong>in</strong>teract with students. Students who experienced<br />

problems sent e-mail messages to <strong>the</strong> lecturer <strong>in</strong> question, who replied to <strong>the</strong> messages with possible solutions.<br />

A lecturer commented <strong>in</strong> support <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> e-mails: ‘Some students too had problems with registration and<br />

we taught <strong>the</strong>m how to use <strong>the</strong> message; so <strong>the</strong>y used to send e-mail messages to us, request<strong>in</strong>g for help from us.’<br />

Pedagogical practices <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>structors on Moodle<br />

Academics’ approaches to teach<strong>in</strong>g were changed as <strong>the</strong>y <strong>in</strong>corporated multimedia and web-based resources to<br />

support learn<strong>in</strong>g. Lecturers uploaded resources that were accurate and up to date for students to <strong>in</strong>teract with,<br />

and made updates to <strong>the</strong> course as and when necessary dur<strong>in</strong>g reviews and notified students. Lecturers developed<br />

detailed course manuals that guided <strong>the</strong> course structure. Each topic <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> course had an <strong>in</strong>troduction. The learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />

objectives <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> course described <strong>the</strong> measurable outcomes <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> course. The learn<strong>in</strong>g objectives addressed content<br />

mastery, critical th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g skills and core learn<strong>in</strong>g skills. The lecturers gave <strong>in</strong>structions to students on how to meet<br />

<strong>the</strong> learn<strong>in</strong>g objectives and <strong>the</strong>se <strong>in</strong>structions were adequate and easy to understand.<br />

Academics also identified assessment as one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> most beneficial areas <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Moodle LMS. Their approaches to<br />

assessment changed as <strong>the</strong>y made use <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> assessment management tools <strong>in</strong> Moodle. One <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong>structors<br />

used quizzes for assessment, while <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r used practical assignments and projects. Some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> forums were<br />

also graded as part <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> assessment. The quizzes consisted <strong>of</strong> multiple choice type questions <strong>in</strong> Phase 1, but short<br />

answer questions and match<strong>in</strong>g type questions were added <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> Phase 2 implementation. These were suitable for<br />

undergraduate level. For postgraduate level, assignments and forum discussions were <strong>the</strong> dom<strong>in</strong>ant <strong>in</strong>struments<br />

used for assessment.<br />

The types <strong>of</strong> assessment <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>structors selected and used measured <strong>the</strong> stated learn<strong>in</strong>g objectives and were consistent<br />

with <strong>the</strong> course activities and resources. The grad<strong>in</strong>g policy for <strong>the</strong> course was transparent and easy to understand, as<br />

specified <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> course manuals. Scores per assessment activity were also stated upfront, so that students knew what<br />

to expect <strong>in</strong> this regard. The types <strong>of</strong> assessment selected and <strong>the</strong> methods used for submitt<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> assessment were<br />

appropriate for <strong>the</strong> hybrid learn<strong>in</strong>g environment. The assessment comprised <strong>the</strong> follow<strong>in</strong>g: quizzes that provided<br />

<strong>in</strong>stant feedback, discussion forums and journals that also provided feedback but not immediately, and upload<strong>in</strong>g<br />

<strong>of</strong> assignments via a web l<strong>in</strong>k. However, one deficiency identified was that <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> rubrics was limited or entirely<br />

absent for some courses. The use <strong>of</strong> rubrics allows <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>structor to specify standards that students should meet <strong>in</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong>ir assignments and projects, and thus rubrics help to enhance <strong>the</strong> quality <strong>of</strong> students’ work.<br />

Academics stated that <strong>the</strong>re was an <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir workload, associated with us<strong>in</strong>g Moodle for <strong>in</strong>structional<br />

delivery. They reported that <strong>the</strong> major time-consum<strong>in</strong>g aspects <strong>of</strong> Moodle use were <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>itial development <strong>of</strong><br />

courses and <strong>the</strong> grad<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> forums, journals and assignments. They also <strong>in</strong>dicated that <strong>the</strong> onl<strong>in</strong>e courseware<br />

development was time consum<strong>in</strong>g and <strong>the</strong>re was a need for <strong>the</strong> onl<strong>in</strong>e courses developed to be recognized among<br />

<strong>the</strong> criteria for staff promotion, to serve as an added <strong>in</strong>centive for onl<strong>in</strong>e courseware development.<br />

It was observed dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> course development workshops that academics preferred one-on-one, on-site, needsbased<br />

and timely tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g – compared to <strong>the</strong> mass-organized workshops. Academics’ support rema<strong>in</strong>ed mostly<br />

local, with assistance from courseware developers’ assistants and occasional facilitation from <strong>the</strong> external and<br />

<strong>in</strong>ternal facilitators dur<strong>in</strong>g workshops.<br />

The current case study research found that <strong>the</strong>se academics clearly perceive Moodle to be an effective tool for<br />

develop<strong>in</strong>g courses and for extend<strong>in</strong>g learn<strong>in</strong>g resources to students outside <strong>of</strong> face-to-face classroom sett<strong>in</strong>gs.<br />

68<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


Us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> Moodle Learn<strong>in</strong>g Management System for Teach<strong>in</strong>g and<br />

Learn<strong>in</strong>g at <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong>, W<strong>in</strong>neba<br />

Students’ use <strong>of</strong> Moodle for learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />

The areas <strong>of</strong> focus <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> analysis <strong>of</strong> data for student use <strong>of</strong> Moodle were resource availability and access to<br />

students, how students use <strong>the</strong>se resources on Moodle, and <strong>the</strong> impact <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> Moodle on <strong>the</strong> quality <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong>ir learn<strong>in</strong>g. As already highlighted, Moodle <strong>in</strong> this project was used to supplement <strong>the</strong> face-to-face classroom<br />

session <strong>in</strong>teractions <strong>in</strong> a hybrid mode. Students’ use <strong>of</strong> Moodle was observed to occur <strong>in</strong> two sett<strong>in</strong>gs: <strong>in</strong>-class faceto-face<br />

<strong>in</strong>teractions with Moodle, and virtual/onl<strong>in</strong>e <strong>in</strong>teractions for <strong>in</strong>dependent and collaborative learn<strong>in</strong>g. In<br />

class, students used Moodle to access presentation material and participate <strong>in</strong> synchronous chats and o<strong>the</strong>r forms<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>teraction with <strong>the</strong> content, colleagues, and <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>structor. They used <strong>the</strong> Moodle platform for <strong>in</strong>dependent<br />

learn<strong>in</strong>g outside <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> classroom. On average, students <strong>in</strong>dicated <strong>the</strong>y spent about six hours a week access<strong>in</strong>g course<br />

resources and perform<strong>in</strong>g activities. The Moodle platform also helped <strong>the</strong>m to collaborate with <strong>the</strong>ir colleagues<br />

and undertake quizzes and assignments onl<strong>in</strong>e.<br />

Students participated <strong>in</strong> onl<strong>in</strong>e forums, journals, chats and wikis, which promoted collaboration among students.<br />

They used forums to contribute and share <strong>the</strong>ir views on topical issues as directed by <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>structor. Chats and<br />

e-mails were used to communicate among <strong>the</strong>mselves and with <strong>the</strong>ir <strong>in</strong>structor on course issues. They also used<br />

journals to document <strong>the</strong>ir reflections on various topics on Moodle. However, <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> journals to document<br />

<strong>the</strong>ir personal experiences and challenges <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> Moodle was not emphasized.<br />

Students had unrestricted access to <strong>the</strong> course and course materials, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g read<strong>in</strong>g materials, lecture notes,<br />

articles, slide presentations and video clips. Accord<strong>in</strong>g to <strong>the</strong> students, access was occasionally <strong>in</strong>terrupted by power<br />

outages that affected Internet connectivity. Access to campus computer laboratories was also limited to scheduled<br />

lecture periods only. Consequently, most students used Internet cafés or <strong>the</strong> campus Wi-Fi connectivity and mobile<br />

modems with <strong>the</strong>ir laptops to access Moodle resources and activities. It would <strong>the</strong>refore appear that students’<br />

ma<strong>in</strong> concerns focused on access and availability <strong>of</strong> comput<strong>in</strong>g and Internet facilities ra<strong>the</strong>r than technological<br />

competencies.<br />

Students were also able to obta<strong>in</strong> academic and technical support via chat and e-mails. As already mentioned,<br />

students were able to send e-mails to <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>structors or chat with <strong>the</strong>m onl<strong>in</strong>e for support related to academic<br />

issues. When students experienced technical difficulties <strong>the</strong>y were able to contact <strong>the</strong> technical support staff via<br />

e-mail and chat, to help <strong>the</strong>m resolve <strong>the</strong>se problems. Students had access to important updates on <strong>the</strong> course as<br />

and when new materials were added to <strong>the</strong> course or when certa<strong>in</strong> changes were made.<br />

Students stated <strong>the</strong>y had positive experiences do<strong>in</strong>g assessment onl<strong>in</strong>e as this provided <strong>in</strong>stant feedback. Students<br />

also observed that <strong>the</strong> quality <strong>of</strong> teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g resources uploaded to Moodle was high. They experienced<br />

both teacher-centred and learner-centred approaches to teach<strong>in</strong>g. Students’ levels <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> competence also <strong>in</strong>creased<br />

as <strong>the</strong>y learned at <strong>the</strong>ir own pace us<strong>in</strong>g Moodle courses, <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> process adopt<strong>in</strong>g o<strong>the</strong>r skills such as chatt<strong>in</strong>g,<br />

exchang<strong>in</strong>g e-mails, research<strong>in</strong>g, social collaboration, and improv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>ir typ<strong>in</strong>g skills. Students received important<br />

updates via Moodle, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g to <strong>the</strong>ir notes, and regard<strong>in</strong>g revisions to assignment due dates, and that helped<br />

<strong>the</strong>m <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir time management.<br />

Overall, students were unanimous <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir view that Moodle was very useful <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir learn<strong>in</strong>g and said <strong>the</strong>y<br />

would encourage o<strong>the</strong>rs to use Moodle. Their ma<strong>in</strong> concern was with <strong>the</strong> unreliability <strong>of</strong> and <strong>in</strong>adequate access<br />

to comput<strong>in</strong>g facilities and <strong>the</strong> Internet.<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

69


Us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> Moodle Learn<strong>in</strong>g Management System for Teach<strong>in</strong>g and<br />

Learn<strong>in</strong>g at <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong>, W<strong>in</strong>neba<br />

CHALLENGES AND BARRIERS TO EFFECTIVE USE OF MOODLE AT UEW<br />

Although <strong>the</strong> Moodle implementation project was a success at UEW, a number <strong>of</strong> challenges were encountered,<br />

<strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> relation to <strong>the</strong> follow<strong>in</strong>g: <strong>in</strong>stitutional culture, <strong>in</strong>adequate <strong>in</strong>frastructure, time constra<strong>in</strong>ts, workloads <strong>of</strong><br />

academics, large class sizes, and low levels <strong>of</strong> technological competence among academics and students (particularly<br />

<strong>the</strong> older students <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> postgraduate course). Due to <strong>the</strong> fairly large scale <strong>of</strong> implementation, <strong>the</strong> project required<br />

plann<strong>in</strong>g, logistics, teamwork, and support from various people.<br />

Dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> plann<strong>in</strong>g stage, <strong>the</strong> programme management team <strong>in</strong>itially had difficulty <strong>in</strong> gett<strong>in</strong>g all team members<br />

to meet regularly, as a result <strong>of</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r <strong>in</strong>stitutional assignments. This problem was exacerbated by <strong>the</strong> multicampus<br />

nature <strong>of</strong> UEW, from where <strong>the</strong> distributed team members participated. The team had to agree to meet<br />

whenever at least three <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> five team members were present for a scheduled meet<strong>in</strong>g. The workload <strong>of</strong> some<br />

team members was such that carry<strong>in</strong>g out <strong>the</strong>ir responsibilities <strong>in</strong> a timely manner was almost impossible. At a<br />

later stage <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> implementation, <strong>the</strong> management team had to be expanded by add<strong>in</strong>g four members, with <strong>the</strong><br />

hope that this would speed up <strong>the</strong> work. There was also reorganization at <strong>the</strong> Externally Funded Projects Office<br />

and this brought about some positive changes to drive <strong>the</strong> implementation forward. For <strong>in</strong>stance, <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>clusion <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> course developers’ assistants and <strong>the</strong> organization <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> writ<strong>in</strong>g retreat for both Projects 1 and 2 helped speed<br />

up <strong>the</strong> implementation process and also <strong>in</strong>creased academics’ participation <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> course development processes.<br />

The project management team also faced certa<strong>in</strong> adm<strong>in</strong>istrative challenges from <strong>the</strong> procurement laws <strong>of</strong> Ghana,<br />

which delayed <strong>the</strong> acquisition <strong>of</strong> equipment and s<strong>of</strong>tware, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> Moodle server, <strong>the</strong> Adobe CS5 Suite<br />

s<strong>of</strong>tware and <strong>the</strong> antivirus s<strong>of</strong>tware. This consequently delayed <strong>the</strong> start <strong>of</strong> Project 2, and <strong>the</strong> project lost a whole<br />

semester <strong>of</strong> implementation, though ultimately most <strong>of</strong> its target outputs and deliverables were achieved. There were<br />

adm<strong>in</strong>istrative delays <strong>in</strong> issu<strong>in</strong>g appo<strong>in</strong>tment letters to various members <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> implementation team (courseware<br />

developers, technical support staff, and multimedia experts).<br />

Technical problems were experienced dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>itial setup. The stand-alone computer on which <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>itial<br />

version <strong>of</strong> Moodle was set up crashed and data was lost. This resulted <strong>in</strong> delays <strong>in</strong> start<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>itial pilot<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

Unfortunately, no provision for backup equipment had been made <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> project budget. However, after <strong>the</strong> crash<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> standalone computer, <strong>the</strong> network adm<strong>in</strong>istrator took steps to perform regular backups <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> data on <strong>the</strong><br />

Moodle platform.<br />

Onl<strong>in</strong>e course development places an additional burden on <strong>the</strong> academics <strong>in</strong>volved. Most <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> academics<br />

<strong>in</strong>dicated that failure to provide <strong>in</strong>centives/motivation to academics for <strong>the</strong> development <strong>of</strong> onl<strong>in</strong>e courses was one<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> barriers to <strong>the</strong>ir uptake <strong>of</strong> educational technology, particularly <strong>in</strong> a situation where large class sizes resulted<br />

<strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>creased workloads for academics.<br />

LESSONS LEARNED FROM COURSE DELIVERY THROUGH MOODLE<br />

Ensure collaboration among staff, and coord<strong>in</strong>ation among all players and processes<br />

Teamwork is essential for <strong>the</strong> success <strong>of</strong> projects, even at <strong>the</strong> plann<strong>in</strong>g stage, as shared responsibility pushes <strong>the</strong><br />

plan forward. Too much bureaucracy and too many formalities can slow progress, as experienced <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>itial<br />

stages <strong>of</strong> Project 2. If proper plann<strong>in</strong>g and projection are not done, <strong>in</strong>stitutional culture and government policies<br />

can negatively affect project progress; a good example <strong>of</strong> this has already been mentioned, where convoluted<br />

procurement processes delayed <strong>the</strong> start <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> project.<br />

Obta<strong>in</strong> buy-<strong>in</strong> from academics<br />

It is important to get those who will carry out <strong>the</strong> processes directly <strong>in</strong>volved <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> project (i.e. adopt<strong>in</strong>g a bottom-<br />

70<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


Us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> Moodle Learn<strong>in</strong>g Management System for Teach<strong>in</strong>g and<br />

Learn<strong>in</strong>g at <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong>, W<strong>in</strong>neba<br />

up approach). The <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI was more successful than previous attempts at technological <strong>in</strong>novation because <strong>the</strong><br />

academics were <strong>in</strong>volved from <strong>the</strong> outset. If academics’ concerns and needs are factored <strong>in</strong>to <strong>the</strong>ir tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g, <strong>the</strong>y<br />

are more likely to benefit from <strong>the</strong> tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g and apply skills and knowledge learned (Palak, 2004).<br />

University academics are overloaded with work and responsibilities, so if workshops are not properly timed <strong>the</strong>re<br />

is low participation. The courseware writ<strong>in</strong>g retreat organised <strong>in</strong> Kumasi is a good example <strong>of</strong> a workshop that was<br />

properly timed and thus well attended by faculty, as compared to participation <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> previous and later workshops.<br />

Time constra<strong>in</strong>ts are <strong>the</strong> cause <strong>of</strong> low participation among academics. Thus, <strong>in</strong> order to ensure active <strong>in</strong>volvement<br />

<strong>of</strong> academics <strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>novations <strong>of</strong> this nature, advocacy is not enough; schedul<strong>in</strong>g tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g workshops for times when<br />

academics are less occupied with o<strong>the</strong>r university activities such as teach<strong>in</strong>g and <strong>in</strong>tern supervision would help.<br />

Set realistic targets based on team competence<br />

Project 1’s slow pace affected <strong>the</strong> implementation <strong>of</strong> Projects 2 and 3. The plan was that Project 1, a basel<strong>in</strong>e<br />

study <strong>of</strong> educational technology at UEW, would provide empirical evidence about academics’ competence <strong>in</strong><br />

technology, access to resources, needs, and concerns. This would have helped with customis<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> content <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> Project 2 tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g workshops to meet <strong>the</strong> needs and concerns <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se academics. Project 3 also needed <strong>the</strong><br />

basel<strong>in</strong>e data and <strong>in</strong>formation to measure <strong>the</strong> immediate impact <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI programme on <strong>the</strong> university<br />

learn<strong>in</strong>g environment; <strong>the</strong> data would have helped to validate <strong>the</strong> f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Project 3 study. Unfortunately,<br />

<strong>the</strong> three projects were runn<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> parallel. In assign<strong>in</strong>g responsibilities for project implementation, adm<strong>in</strong>istrative<br />

and academic leadership should assign timeframes for project completion based on realistic evaluation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> skills<br />

and competencies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> concerned staff for each project. Adequate capacity-build<strong>in</strong>g support has to be built <strong>in</strong>to<br />

projects where staff skills need to be developed for optimum project implementation.<br />

Avoid one-<strong>of</strong>f, generic workshops<br />

For purposes <strong>of</strong> design<strong>in</strong>g courses, one-<strong>of</strong>f workshops attended by large groups <strong>of</strong> lecturers do not appropriately<br />

address <strong>in</strong>dividual needs and concerns. Smaller groups or one-on-one mentorship is needed as a follow up to<br />

large-group workshops <strong>in</strong> order to enhance academics’ technology <strong>in</strong>tegration tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g.<br />

The problem <strong>of</strong> lack <strong>of</strong> follow-up support after large-group workshops was partly resolved when <strong>the</strong> management<br />

team decided to recruit <strong>the</strong> Ohio University-tra<strong>in</strong>ed <strong>in</strong>structional technologists to assist course developers onsite and<br />

on a one-on-one basis. These six educational technologists were among UEW staff who had educational technology<br />

tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g from a collaborative programme between UEW and Ohio University. The collaboration <strong>in</strong>volved a twoyear<br />

MEd programme <strong>in</strong> computer education and technology, which was certified by Ohio University.<br />

Address poor connectivity and power cuts<br />

Onl<strong>in</strong>e teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g is only effective where Internet connectivity and power are reliable. At UEW poor<br />

connectivity and power cuts have slowed progress or disrupted activities <strong>in</strong> various ways dur<strong>in</strong>g workshops, <strong>in</strong><br />

class and outside class when students and academics want to use <strong>the</strong> Internet to access Moodle. Consequently, to<br />

ensure effective implementation at UEW <strong>of</strong> educational technology <strong>in</strong>novation, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g Moodle, <strong>the</strong> university<br />

must improve <strong>the</strong> connectivity and power supply situation.<br />

Improve <strong>in</strong>frastructure<br />

Access to comput<strong>in</strong>g facilities is still a concern for students despite <strong>the</strong> improvement <strong>of</strong> network <strong>in</strong>frastructure<br />

and sett<strong>in</strong>g up <strong>of</strong> computer labs for student tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g. The consequence is that students were able to access Moodle<br />

dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> face-to-face <strong>in</strong>teractions <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> lab sett<strong>in</strong>gs but had no access outside <strong>of</strong> lecture periods. This was<br />

confirmed by one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> students dur<strong>in</strong>g a focus group <strong>in</strong>terview.<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

71


Us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> Moodle Learn<strong>in</strong>g Management System for Teach<strong>in</strong>g and<br />

Learn<strong>in</strong>g at <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong>, W<strong>in</strong>neba<br />

Students were highly motivated to use Moodle for learn<strong>in</strong>g and most <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>m had to rely on Internet cafés or buy<strong>in</strong>g<br />

mobile modems <strong>in</strong> order to access Moodle on <strong>the</strong>ir laptops. This <strong>in</strong>curred extra costs to <strong>the</strong> students. Despite <strong>the</strong><br />

huge <strong>in</strong>vestment <strong>in</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> labs <strong>the</strong>re is still room to improve students’ access to comput<strong>in</strong>g facilities, without which<br />

<strong>the</strong> onl<strong>in</strong>e activities would be jeopardized.<br />

RECOMMENDATIONS<br />

Based on <strong>the</strong> f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs <strong>of</strong> this project <strong>the</strong> follow<strong>in</strong>g recommendations are made:<br />

• The university should cont<strong>in</strong>ue to <strong>in</strong>vest <strong>in</strong> build<strong>in</strong>g computer laboratories and improv<strong>in</strong>g network <strong>in</strong>frastructure<br />

to provide easy and reliable access to <strong>the</strong> Internet for academics and students alike. The current case study results<br />

showed that access time for cont<strong>in</strong>u<strong>in</strong>g students (second-, third- and fourth-year undergraduate students) was<br />

limited, as only first-year students had access to <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>structional labs. Cont<strong>in</strong>u<strong>in</strong>g students relied on <strong>the</strong>ir<br />

personal laptops and Internet cafés <strong>in</strong> order to access <strong>the</strong> Moodle course sites outside <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> campus. This<br />

<strong>in</strong>creased <strong>the</strong> cost <strong>of</strong> learn<strong>in</strong>g to <strong>the</strong>m;<br />

• There should be formal recognition <strong>of</strong> staff that adopt and use educational technologies to improve <strong>the</strong> quality<br />

<strong>of</strong> teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> university. Such recognition could be <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> form <strong>of</strong> promotion, salary merit<br />

<strong>in</strong>creases and/or o<strong>the</strong>r tangible benefits. This would go a long way towards motivat<strong>in</strong>g more academics to<br />

adopt <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong>s for pedagogical purposes;<br />

• Regular and timely workshops should be organized for academics engaged <strong>in</strong> onl<strong>in</strong>e course development<br />

on an ongo<strong>in</strong>g basis. The experiences from <strong>the</strong> <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI showed that academics’ participation <strong>in</strong> tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g<br />

workshops and <strong>the</strong> speed <strong>of</strong> development <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir courses depend on <strong>the</strong> appropriate tim<strong>in</strong>g and location/<br />

venues for such workshops;<br />

• Facilitation <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> form <strong>of</strong> one-on-one technical support and assistance should be provided for academics<br />

<strong>in</strong>volved <strong>in</strong> onl<strong>in</strong>e courseware development. The tra<strong>in</strong>ed <strong>in</strong>structional technologists should be empowered,<br />

challenged and encouraged to provide technical support through one-on-one mentorship relationships with<br />

academics;<br />

• The university should <strong>in</strong>corporate onl<strong>in</strong>e courseware development as an item <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> strategic plan <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

university, to ensure that <strong>the</strong> success <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> project is susta<strong>in</strong>ed well beyond its life span. Where <strong>the</strong> adoption <strong>of</strong><br />

onl<strong>in</strong>e <strong>in</strong>structional delivery is <strong>in</strong>stitutionalized, academics will be motivated and encouraged to use available<br />

<strong>ICT</strong>s for teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g;<br />

• A young and vibrant Moodle management team should be put <strong>in</strong> place, to manage and research new<br />

developments that will enhance <strong>the</strong> Moodle LMS. The six <strong>in</strong>structional technologists tra<strong>in</strong>ed could form <strong>the</strong><br />

pool <strong>of</strong> expertise <strong>in</strong> this regard;<br />

• Special orientation courses should be developed and organized for students <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Moodle LMS.<br />

The f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> current case study showed that postgraduate students were not sufficiently technologically<br />

competent to explore <strong>the</strong> essential tools <strong>of</strong> Moodle for <strong>the</strong>ir learn<strong>in</strong>g and research work. Instructors should<br />

<strong>the</strong>refore spend some time br<strong>in</strong>g<strong>in</strong>g such students up to speed with <strong>the</strong> Moodle platform before commenc<strong>in</strong>g<br />

actual academic use <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> system; and<br />

• Special Moodle user guides and manuals should be developed and distributed to academics and students.<br />

Academics were given a PDF version <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Moodle user manual, and <strong>the</strong>y should be encouraged to use this<br />

resource <strong>in</strong>dependently dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> deployment <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir courses on Moodle.<br />

72<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


Us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> Moodle Learn<strong>in</strong>g Management System for Teach<strong>in</strong>g and<br />

Learn<strong>in</strong>g at <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong>, W<strong>in</strong>neba<br />

REFERENCES<br />

Bongey, S. B., Cizadlo, G., & Kalnbach, L. (2005). Us<strong>in</strong>g a course management system (LMS) to meet <strong>the</strong><br />

challenges <strong>of</strong> large lecture classes. Campus-wide Information Systems, 22(5), 252–262.<br />

coreDNA. (2009). Everyth<strong>in</strong>g you need to know about digital market<strong>in</strong>g. Retrieved 30 October 2010 from www.<br />

coreDNA.com<br />

Dukes, L. L., War<strong>in</strong>g, S. M., & Koorland, M. A. (2006). The blended course delivery method: The not-so-distant<br />

education. Journal <strong>of</strong> Comput<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> Teacher <strong>Education</strong>, 22(4), 153–158.<br />

Erah, P. O. & Dairo, E. A. (2008). Pharmacy students’ perception <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> application <strong>of</strong> learn<strong>in</strong>g management<br />

systems <strong>in</strong> patient oriented pharmacy education: University <strong>of</strong> Ben<strong>in</strong> experience. International Journal <strong>of</strong> Health<br />

Research, June, 1(2): 63–72.<br />

Greyl<strong>in</strong>g, F., Kara, M., Makka, A., & Van Niekerk, S., (2008) IT worked for US: Onl<strong>in</strong>e strategies to faciliate<br />

learn<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> large (undergraduate) classes. Electronic Journal <strong>of</strong> e-Learn<strong>in</strong>g, 6, 179–188.<br />

Hall, B. (2004). New technology def<strong>in</strong>itions. Retrieved 18 December 2013 from www.brandonhall.com/public/<br />

glossary/<strong>in</strong>dex.htm<br />

Left Bra<strong>in</strong> Media. (2010/11). e-Learn<strong>in</strong>g. Understand<strong>in</strong>g your LMS options. Retrieved 18 December 2013 from<br />

www.leftbra<strong>in</strong>media.com/2.1_lms_systems.html<br />

Liaw, S. S. (2004). Considerations for develop<strong>in</strong>g constructivist Web-based learn<strong>in</strong>g. International Journal <strong>of</strong><br />

Instructional Media, 31(3), 309–321.<br />

Morgan, G. (2003). Faculty use <strong>of</strong> course management systems. Retrieved 20 January 2007 from www.educause.edu/<br />

ir/library/pdf/ers0302/rs/ers0302w.pdf<br />

Owen, P. S. & Demb, A. (2004). Change dynamics and leadership <strong>in</strong> technology implementation. The Journal <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>, 75 (6), 636–666.<br />

Palak, D. (2004). Teachers’ beliefs <strong>in</strong> relation to <strong>the</strong>ir <strong>in</strong>structional technology practices. Doctoral dissertation,<br />

West Virg<strong>in</strong>ia University, Morgantown.<br />

Ullman, C. & Rab<strong>in</strong>owitz, M. (2004). Course management systems and <strong>the</strong> re<strong>in</strong>vention <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>struction. THE<br />

Journal. Retrieved 24 April 2011 from www.<strong>the</strong>journal.com/articles/17014<br />

Unw<strong>in</strong>, T., Kleessen, B., Hollow, B., Williams, J., Oloo, J. M., Alwala, J., Mutimucuio, I., Eduardo, F., & Muianga,<br />

X. (2010). Digital learn<strong>in</strong>g management systems <strong>in</strong> Africa: Rhetoric and reality, open learn<strong>in</strong>g. The Journal <strong>of</strong> Open<br />

and Distance <strong>Education</strong>, 25(1), 5–23.<br />

Vovides, Y., Sanchez-Alonso, S., Mitropoulou, V. & Nickmans, G. (2007). The use <strong>of</strong> e-learn<strong>in</strong>g course management<br />

systems to support learn<strong>in</strong>g strategies and to improve self-regulated learn<strong>in</strong>g. <strong>Education</strong>al Research Review, 2(1),<br />

64–74.<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

73


Us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> Moodle Learn<strong>in</strong>g Management System for Teach<strong>in</strong>g and<br />

Learn<strong>in</strong>g at <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong>, W<strong>in</strong>neba<br />

Zhang, D., Zhao, J., Zhou, L., & Numamaker, J. (2004). Can e-learn<strong>in</strong>g replace classroom learn<strong>in</strong>g? Communication<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> ACM, 47(5), 75–78.<br />

Zhu, C. (2012). Student satisfaction, performance, and knowledge construction <strong>in</strong> onl<strong>in</strong>e collaborative learn<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

<strong>Education</strong>al Technology & Society, 15(1), 127–136.<br />

74<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


Us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> Moodle Learn<strong>in</strong>g Management System for Teach<strong>in</strong>g and<br />

Learn<strong>in</strong>g at <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong>, W<strong>in</strong>neba<br />

NOTES:<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

75


Design<strong>in</strong>g and Develop<strong>in</strong>g e-Content <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>:<br />

The University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan model<br />

Design<strong>in</strong>g and Develop<strong>in</strong>g e-Content<br />

<strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: The University <strong>of</strong><br />

Ibadan model<br />

Ayotola Aremu<br />

Faculty <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong><br />

University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan, Nigeria<br />

ayotk2001@yahoo.com<br />

Olaosebikan Fakolujo<br />

Faculty <strong>of</strong> Technology<br />

University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan, Nigeria<br />

ola@fakolujo.com<br />

Ayodeji Oluleye<br />

Faculty <strong>of</strong> Technology<br />

University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan, Nigeria<br />

aoluleye@gmail.com<br />

ABSTRACT<br />

This case study presents a systematic model <strong>of</strong> technology <strong>in</strong>tegration, which could be adapted <strong>in</strong> any higher<br />

education <strong>in</strong>stitution across <strong>the</strong> African cont<strong>in</strong>ent. Based on <strong>the</strong> experiences <strong>of</strong> 55 content developers at <strong>the</strong><br />

University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan, <strong>in</strong> Nigeria, <strong>the</strong> three-phase model for e-content development captures <strong>the</strong> details <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

plann<strong>in</strong>g, tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g and development, and pilot and deployment phases <strong>of</strong> educational technology <strong>in</strong>tegration <strong>in</strong><br />

teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g that can ensure both <strong>the</strong> effectiveness <strong>of</strong> educational technology use and <strong>the</strong> susta<strong>in</strong>ability<br />

<strong>of</strong> educational technology projects.<br />

Keywords: technology <strong>in</strong>tegration, educational technology, three-phase model for e-content development,<br />

University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan case study, distance education, Partnership for <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong> <strong>in</strong> Africa (<strong>PHEA</strong>)<br />

<strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiative (ETI)<br />

INTRODUCTION<br />

The value <strong>of</strong> us<strong>in</strong>g educational technology to support improvement <strong>of</strong> teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g has been documented<br />

extensively, with <strong>the</strong> various support<strong>in</strong>g hardware devices hav<strong>in</strong>g evolved from large and immovable ma<strong>in</strong>frame<br />

devices, through personal desktop computers, and now encompass<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> handheld mobile devices giv<strong>in</strong>g<br />

users <strong>the</strong> ability to access <strong>the</strong> Internet from anywhere <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> world. <strong>Higher</strong> education <strong>in</strong>stitutions are <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>gly<br />

harness<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> affordances <strong>of</strong> educational technology as a way <strong>of</strong> enhanc<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> quality <strong>of</strong> teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

A significant affordance <strong>of</strong> onl<strong>in</strong>e teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g is that it provides a platform for collaboration, social<br />

network<strong>in</strong>g, and <strong>in</strong>formation creation, shar<strong>in</strong>g and retrieval by teachers and learners at any time or place. Whe<strong>the</strong>r<br />

it is used to <strong>in</strong>teract with distance education or ‘regular’ learners, onl<strong>in</strong>e learn<strong>in</strong>g can encompass creat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>teractive<br />

web pages, synchronous and asynchronous discussions with peers and lecturers, video and teleconferenc<strong>in</strong>g, and<br />

so on.<br />

The University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan (UI), founded <strong>in</strong> 1948, is <strong>the</strong> oldest university <strong>in</strong> Nigeria. A major strategic shift for <strong>the</strong><br />

university <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> past five years has been <strong>the</strong> emphasis on postgraduate education and a rejuvenation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> system<br />

to achieve excellence <strong>in</strong> teach<strong>in</strong>g, research, and community service. The university considers <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> educational<br />

technology to be supportive <strong>of</strong> its vision <strong>of</strong> be<strong>in</strong>g a world-class <strong>in</strong>stitution for academic excellence, geared towards<br />

76<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


Design<strong>in</strong>g and Develop<strong>in</strong>g e-Content <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>:<br />

The University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan model<br />

meet<strong>in</strong>g societal needs. In achiev<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> university’s mission <strong>of</strong> ‘expand<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> frontiers <strong>of</strong> knowledge through<br />

provision <strong>of</strong> excellent conditions for learn<strong>in</strong>g and research’, <strong>in</strong>formation and communication technology (<strong>ICT</strong>) has<br />

played a major role. The Partnership for <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong> <strong>in</strong> Africa (<strong>PHEA</strong>) <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiative<br />

(ETI) has assisted <strong>the</strong> university <strong>in</strong> deploy<strong>in</strong>g modern <strong>ICT</strong> tools and methodologies <strong>in</strong> support <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> development<br />

<strong>of</strong> educational materials that can be used to enhance <strong>the</strong> teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g process.<br />

Among <strong>the</strong> reasons for <strong>in</strong>vest<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> educational technology at UI were <strong>the</strong> follow<strong>in</strong>g:<br />

• Implement<strong>in</strong>g discipl<strong>in</strong>e-specific pedagogical strategies that require students’ active engagement and that<br />

encourage <strong>in</strong> students <strong>the</strong> development <strong>of</strong> problem-solv<strong>in</strong>g and problem-pos<strong>in</strong>g skills, supported by technologyenabled<br />

learn<strong>in</strong>g environments;<br />

• Creat<strong>in</strong>g learn<strong>in</strong>g environments that challenge students to become actively engaged, <strong>in</strong>dependent lifelong<br />

learners <strong>in</strong>side and outside <strong>of</strong> formal learn<strong>in</strong>g spaces;<br />

• Creat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>teractive learn<strong>in</strong>g supported by a variety <strong>of</strong> digital media;<br />

• Offer<strong>in</strong>g flexible and cost-effective quality learn<strong>in</strong>g to time-constra<strong>in</strong>ed and economically deprived students;<br />

and<br />

• Alleviat<strong>in</strong>g staff and space capacity constra<strong>in</strong>ts <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitution.<br />

This case study focuses on two <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI projects that <strong>the</strong> university embarked on to achieve <strong>the</strong>se objectives:<br />

<strong>the</strong> Capacity Build<strong>in</strong>g and Digital Content Development project; and <strong>the</strong> Open Courseware Development for<br />

Science and Technology project.<br />

The Capacity Build<strong>in</strong>g and Digital Content Development project aimed to equip staff with appropriate teach<strong>in</strong>g<br />

and learn<strong>in</strong>g methods that would respond to <strong>the</strong> follow<strong>in</strong>g k<strong>in</strong>ds <strong>of</strong> challenges: overcrowd<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> lecture rooms;<br />

obsolete tools and equipment; <strong>in</strong>adequate knowledge <strong>of</strong> new teach<strong>in</strong>g techniques; and lack <strong>of</strong> skills <strong>in</strong> develop<strong>in</strong>g<br />

appropriate materials for teach<strong>in</strong>g. The major goal <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> project was to develop <strong>the</strong> capacity <strong>of</strong> faculty staff to<br />

develop e-content and overall materials for 12 identified courses. The participants were drawn from <strong>the</strong> faculties<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong> and Pharmacy respectively, as well as from <strong>the</strong> university’s General Studies Unit and <strong>the</strong> College <strong>of</strong><br />

Medic<strong>in</strong>e.<br />

The Open Courseware Development for Science and Technology project aimed to develop open courseware for<br />

a small selection <strong>of</strong> exist<strong>in</strong>g UI science and technology courses. Open courseware was developed by adapt<strong>in</strong>g<br />

exist<strong>in</strong>g course content where possible and develop<strong>in</strong>g new content where necessary. The aim <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> project was<br />

to improve staff and student awareness <strong>of</strong> open courseware and <strong>the</strong> possibilities it <strong>of</strong>fers. Ten courses were selected<br />

for development based on key criteria such as large class size and a record <strong>of</strong> poor performance by students.<br />

The purpose <strong>of</strong> this case study is to generate, evolve and recommend a model for e-content design and development<br />

<strong>in</strong> higher education <strong>in</strong>stitutions <strong>in</strong> Nigeria based on <strong>the</strong> experiences at UI with <strong>the</strong> <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI. This was to be<br />

achieved by document<strong>in</strong>g and analys<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> steps that led to <strong>the</strong> design <strong>of</strong> e-content for some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> university<br />

courses, highlight<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> successes and failures <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> process.<br />

CASE STUDY QUESTIONS<br />

A number <strong>of</strong> questions were posed <strong>in</strong> order to guide <strong>the</strong> study:<br />

Question 1: Faculty development model<br />

How appropriate was <strong>the</strong> faculty development model?<br />

Were e-content tra<strong>in</strong>ers appropriately identified?<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

77


Design<strong>in</strong>g and Develop<strong>in</strong>g e-Content <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>:<br />

The University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan model<br />

Was <strong>the</strong> process <strong>of</strong> course and e-content development team selection appropriate?<br />

Question 2: Successes<br />

What successes have been achieved?<br />

Question 3: Challenges<br />

What where <strong>the</strong> limitations <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> development process?<br />

Question 4: Provid<strong>in</strong>g explanations<br />

What are <strong>the</strong> plausible reasons for <strong>the</strong> successes/failures encountered?<br />

Question 5: Suggestions for improvement<br />

What could have been done better?<br />

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK<br />

The follow<strong>in</strong>g four <strong>the</strong>ories were used to generate constructs for successful <strong>in</strong>tegration <strong>of</strong> technology and were used<br />

as a guide <strong>in</strong> analys<strong>in</strong>g responses from <strong>the</strong> participants <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> study: <strong>the</strong> Comb<strong>in</strong>ed Technology Acceptance Model<br />

and Theory <strong>of</strong> Planned Behaviour (C-TAM & TPB); <strong>the</strong> Motivational Model; and <strong>in</strong>novation diffusion <strong>the</strong>ory.<br />

The <strong>in</strong>clusion <strong>of</strong> ‘Comb<strong>in</strong>ed’ <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> name C-TAM & TPB refers to <strong>the</strong> fact that <strong>the</strong> model comb<strong>in</strong>es <strong>the</strong> predictors<br />

<strong>of</strong> TPB with <strong>the</strong> construct ‘perceived usefulness’ from <strong>the</strong> TAM to provide a hybrid model (Taylor & Todd, 1995).<br />

The core constructs that could determ<strong>in</strong>e whe<strong>the</strong>r a technology is accepted and used accord<strong>in</strong>g to this <strong>the</strong>ory are:<br />

i) attitude towards behaviour, ii) subjective norm, iii) perceived behavioural control, and iv) perceived usefulness.<br />

In this research, <strong>the</strong>se constructs have been <strong>in</strong>vestigated as a way to provide explanations for <strong>the</strong> observations that<br />

would be documented. The TPB expla<strong>in</strong>s adoption issues and predicts <strong>in</strong>tention to use and actual use <strong>of</strong> workplace<br />

technology (Umarji & Seaman, 2005). One <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> additional constructs <strong>in</strong>cluded <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> TPB (Ajzen, 2006) is<br />

‘perceived behavioural control’, which represents <strong>the</strong> ease or difficulty <strong>of</strong> perform<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> target behaviour.<br />

In <strong>the</strong> Motivational Model, Davis, Bagozzi and Warshaw (1992) applied Motivational <strong>the</strong>ory to understand new<br />

technology adoption and use (Venkatesh & Speier, 1999; Venkatesh, Morris, Davis & Davis, 2003). The two<br />

constructs – extr<strong>in</strong>sic motivation and <strong>in</strong>tr<strong>in</strong>sic motivation – are particularly relevant to <strong>the</strong> current research, where<br />

<strong>the</strong> success <strong>of</strong> e-content development was largely affected by <strong>the</strong> motivation <strong>of</strong> staff.<br />

Innovation diffusion <strong>the</strong>ory (Rogers, 1995) has been used s<strong>in</strong>ce <strong>the</strong> 1960s to study a variety <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>novations. It was<br />

adapted by Moore and Benbasat (1991) to <strong>in</strong>vestigate <strong>in</strong>dividual acceptance <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>novations with<strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>formation<br />

systems. The core constructs <strong>of</strong> this <strong>the</strong>ory, which would be relevant for provid<strong>in</strong>g explanations for <strong>the</strong> current<br />

research, <strong>in</strong>clude <strong>the</strong> follow<strong>in</strong>g: relative advantage; image; results demonstrability; and voluntar<strong>in</strong>ess <strong>of</strong> use.<br />

These <strong>the</strong>ories provided <strong>the</strong> guidel<strong>in</strong>es for design<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> questionnaire for collect<strong>in</strong>g data, and align<strong>in</strong>g focus group<br />

discussion (FGD) questions, which elicited <strong>in</strong>formation about <strong>the</strong> process <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> e-content development <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

university. This was a great <strong>in</strong>put <strong>in</strong>to <strong>the</strong> UI evolutionary model because it provided <strong>in</strong>formation about what<br />

was workable, realistic and efficient.<br />

METHODOLOGY<br />

The current study was purely qualitative <strong>in</strong> approach, and made use <strong>of</strong> a questionnaire, structured <strong>in</strong>terviews and<br />

FGDs designed to collect <strong>in</strong>formation. The bi-annual <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI reports were also used as a source <strong>of</strong> primary<br />

78<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


Design<strong>in</strong>g and Develop<strong>in</strong>g e-Content <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>:<br />

The University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan model<br />

data about <strong>the</strong> project activities. The questionnaire focused on <strong>the</strong> process <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> development <strong>of</strong> e-content <strong>in</strong><br />

order to answer <strong>the</strong> questions about challenges faced as well as successes recorded.<br />

Each course development team was asked to complete a questionnaire. In total, 13 <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> 20 questionnaires<br />

distributed were returned. The FGDs lasted between 45 and 60 m<strong>in</strong>utes. Six FGDs were conducted, with between<br />

five and ten developers <strong>in</strong> each discussion group. Notes were taken on responses based on <strong>the</strong> items <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> FGD<br />

guide. The same personnel facilitated <strong>the</strong> FGDs across <strong>the</strong> groups.<br />

The sample used for validat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> study comprised all 55 e-content courseware developers across <strong>the</strong> faculties who<br />

were <strong>in</strong>volved <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> phases <strong>of</strong> design and development <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> e-content. This <strong>in</strong>volved <strong>the</strong> follow<strong>in</strong>g faculties and<br />

units: <strong>Education</strong>, Basic Medical Sciences, Cl<strong>in</strong>ical Science, Pharmacy, Technology, Science, <strong>the</strong> General Studies<br />

Unit, and <strong>the</strong> African Regional Centre for Information Studies (ARCIS). The FGDs were conducted <strong>in</strong> groups <strong>of</strong><br />

developers, based on <strong>the</strong>ir faculties.<br />

Information provided from <strong>the</strong> questionnaire and <strong>the</strong> FGDs was analysed based on <strong>the</strong> <strong>the</strong>mes identified <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong>ories. This <strong>in</strong>formation was used to answer <strong>the</strong> questions about successes and challenges <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> development<br />

process. Plausible reasons for successes achieved and failures encountered were considered us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> variables <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> models and <strong>the</strong>ories. Suggestions for improvement were <strong>the</strong>n outl<strong>in</strong>ed.<br />

FINDINGS<br />

Study question 1: Faculty development model<br />

How appropriate was <strong>the</strong> faculty development model?<br />

The Workshop Model (Yilmazel-Sah<strong>in</strong> & Oxford, 2010; Teclehaimanot & Lamb, 2005) was used <strong>in</strong> this project.<br />

It comprised <strong>the</strong> follow<strong>in</strong>g stages:<br />

• An awareness workshop on what technologies could help to enhance <strong>the</strong> quality <strong>of</strong> teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g;<br />

• Tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g workshops on us<strong>in</strong>g Moodle, <strong>of</strong>fered via a Moodle platform;<br />

• A three-day retreat for development <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> e-content;<br />

• Review workshops to present courses developed <strong>in</strong>-house; and<br />

• A quality assurance workshop.<br />

The awareness workshop was seen as a necessary process and vital to ensur<strong>in</strong>g a focus for <strong>the</strong> project. At this<br />

workshop, various technologies that could be used for teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g were showcased. The tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g sessions<br />

were well handled accord<strong>in</strong>g to <strong>the</strong> developers, and us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> Moodle platform for tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g on how to use Moodle<br />

was seen as a good strategy. However, two <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> faculty groups felt it would have been better to tra<strong>in</strong> developers<br />

on <strong>in</strong>structional design and pedagogy before tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>m on <strong>the</strong> Moodle platform or any technology. This is<br />

because most <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> developers had <strong>the</strong>ir first contact with pedagogical issues at this tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g.<br />

Accord<strong>in</strong>g to <strong>the</strong> developers, <strong>the</strong> turn<strong>in</strong>g po<strong>in</strong>t for this project was <strong>the</strong> three-day development retreat, which was<br />

held outside <strong>the</strong> university. Developers spent concentrated time away from <strong>the</strong>ir rout<strong>in</strong>e schedules, and this yielded<br />

<strong>the</strong> best results <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> process <strong>of</strong> this project. One <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> reasons for <strong>the</strong> success <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> retreat, as identified by a<br />

developer, was that from <strong>the</strong> outset ‘goals were set’. These goals were revisited and reviewed dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> course <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> retreat. The review workshops, accord<strong>in</strong>g to some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> developers, helped to stimulate more positive action.<br />

See<strong>in</strong>g what o<strong>the</strong>rs had accomplished, as expla<strong>in</strong>ed dur<strong>in</strong>g one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> FGDs, motivated o<strong>the</strong>rs to work harder and<br />

improve <strong>the</strong>ir work. Unfortunately, <strong>the</strong>se workshops were few and far between.<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

79


Design<strong>in</strong>g and Develop<strong>in</strong>g e-Content <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>:<br />

The University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan model<br />

Were e-content tra<strong>in</strong>ers appropriately identified?<br />

The tra<strong>in</strong>ers were identified by <strong>the</strong> <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI team and <strong>in</strong>cluded those who provided support for <strong>the</strong> development<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> projects. This meant <strong>the</strong> tra<strong>in</strong>ers were familiar with <strong>the</strong> development groups and <strong>the</strong>ir expectations, which<br />

helped <strong>the</strong> process <strong>of</strong> development. Aris<strong>in</strong>g from this is <strong>the</strong> recommendation that for future similar exercises, <strong>the</strong><br />

tra<strong>in</strong>ers and experts be identified upfront and <strong>in</strong>volved <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> project development process.<br />

Was <strong>the</strong> process <strong>of</strong> course and e-content development team selection appropriate?<br />

In all, 22 courses were selected for <strong>the</strong> project. These courses were selected based on predeterm<strong>in</strong>ed criteria. The<br />

courses chosen were all characterized by one or more <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> follow<strong>in</strong>g features:<br />

• Offered to a large class.<br />

• Dependent on conventional chalk and talk method.<br />

• Inadequate time to cover <strong>the</strong> course content.<br />

• Insufficient learn<strong>in</strong>g materials for <strong>the</strong> course.<br />

• A record <strong>of</strong> poor performance by students.<br />

• Non-<strong>in</strong>teractive classes.<br />

• Need for practical work support <strong>in</strong> terms <strong>of</strong> videos, animations and visuals, which were not be<strong>in</strong>g provided<br />

<strong>in</strong> laboratories.<br />

Due to tight work schedules <strong>of</strong> some staff, only 20 <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> 22 courses selected were developed.<br />

The course development teams comprised course lecturers and graduate assistants. From <strong>the</strong> proposal stage,<br />

each faculty <strong>in</strong>volved at <strong>the</strong> university was asked to nom<strong>in</strong>ate staff already us<strong>in</strong>g <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> some way; <strong>the</strong>se people<br />

<strong>the</strong>n formed <strong>the</strong> core faculty team. After courses had been selected, more faculty members who were ei<strong>the</strong>r<br />

teach<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> courses or teach<strong>in</strong>g related courses were nom<strong>in</strong>ated to jo<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> development teams. Graduate assistants<br />

(postgraduate students) were also selected based on <strong>the</strong>ir <strong>ICT</strong> experience.<br />

What characterized <strong>the</strong>se groups <strong>of</strong> people, accord<strong>in</strong>g to one FGD, was ‘commitment, <strong>in</strong>tegrity, and <strong>the</strong> fact that<br />

<strong>the</strong>y were f<strong>in</strong>ishers’. FGDs revealed that <strong>the</strong>se teams were effective because <strong>the</strong> departments nom<strong>in</strong>ated <strong>the</strong>m and<br />

developers would not want to underm<strong>in</strong>e <strong>the</strong> confidence placed <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>m. Accord<strong>in</strong>g to one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> groups (<strong>the</strong><br />

ARCIS group): ‘Participation was a departmental mandate because <strong>the</strong> team leader for <strong>the</strong> group was <strong>the</strong> head <strong>of</strong><br />

ARCIS.’ ‘Team leaders”, accord<strong>in</strong>g to ano<strong>the</strong>r group (General Studies group), ‘should be more experienced <strong>in</strong> group<br />

management and dynamics and lead by <strong>in</strong>volvement’. This, <strong>the</strong>y said, would enhance <strong>the</strong> process <strong>of</strong> development.<br />

One important suggestion that came out <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> FGDs was that team members nom<strong>in</strong>ated by <strong>the</strong> department<br />

should be allowed to teach <strong>the</strong> courses developed for some time, before those courses are reallocated to o<strong>the</strong>r<br />

lecturers <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> department. Accord<strong>in</strong>g to <strong>the</strong> FGDs, <strong>the</strong> process <strong>of</strong> team selection was deemed to be adequate.<br />

Study question 2: Successes<br />

The successes achieved have been grouped accord<strong>in</strong>g to <strong>the</strong> follow<strong>in</strong>g:<br />

• Number <strong>of</strong> courses completed: The 20 courses developed were seen as great achievements;<br />

• Skills <strong>of</strong> developers: Faculty members attested that <strong>the</strong> e-content development project helped to improve <strong>the</strong><br />

follow<strong>in</strong>g skills:<br />

◦◦<br />

Pedagogical (<strong>in</strong>structional design) skills. Some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> faculty members confirmed that exposure to <strong>the</strong>se<br />

newer forms <strong>of</strong> technology exposed <strong>the</strong>m to greater and better possibilities <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> world <strong>of</strong> teach<strong>in</strong>g and<br />

learn<strong>in</strong>g, some <strong>of</strong> which <strong>the</strong>y had adopted <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> classroom situation. One <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> developers acknowledged<br />

that he had learned about pedagogy for <strong>the</strong> first time through this project;<br />

80<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


Design<strong>in</strong>g and Develop<strong>in</strong>g e-Content <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>:<br />

The University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan model<br />

◦◦<br />

Skills to develop activities <strong>in</strong> Moodle (this was <strong>the</strong> first Moodle experience for 80% <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> project team); and<br />

◦◦<br />

Curriculum development skills, especially perta<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g to <strong>the</strong> design <strong>of</strong> new curricula. A member <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

Pharmacy group attested that she had carried <strong>the</strong> learn<strong>in</strong>g from this experience to ano<strong>the</strong>r curriculum<br />

development project.<br />

• Enhanced understand<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> teach<strong>in</strong>g: Dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> FGDs, content developers said <strong>the</strong>y had developed a better<br />

appreciation <strong>of</strong> teach<strong>in</strong>g and its various complications. Some had never previously considered pedagogical<br />

tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g to be necessary, believ<strong>in</strong>g that anybody could teach without any form <strong>of</strong> tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g. For most, this<br />

perspective had changed. This enabled developers to beg<strong>in</strong> to explore <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r educational technologies<br />

such as author<strong>in</strong>g tools and also <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> data projectors;<br />

• Increased self-efficacy: A success <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> project was enhanced self-efficacy <strong>in</strong> us<strong>in</strong>g computers, especially for<br />

research assistants associated with <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong> group. This enhanced o<strong>the</strong>r areas <strong>of</strong> collaboration among<br />

staff and students outside <strong>the</strong> <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI group <strong>in</strong> terms <strong>of</strong> discover<strong>in</strong>g new technology skills; and<br />

• Fostered relationships: Participation <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> project enhanced <strong>in</strong>ter-faculty relationships and opportunities<br />

for multidiscipl<strong>in</strong>ary research. The Pharmacy group was excited to explore opportunities for research <strong>in</strong><br />

collaboration with <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong> group. It is highly likely that such relationships would lead to a blend<strong>in</strong>g<br />

<strong>of</strong> skills across faculties.<br />

Study question 3: Challenges<br />

The follow<strong>in</strong>g challenges were identified:<br />

Time<br />

A constant challenge dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> course <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> project was time. Schedul<strong>in</strong>g time for <strong>the</strong> workshops was difficult,<br />

because this had to be balanced with o<strong>the</strong>r, compet<strong>in</strong>g schedules. Dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g sessions held on campus,<br />

developers kept go<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> and out <strong>of</strong> meet<strong>in</strong>gs to attend to matters requir<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>ir attention <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir departments<br />

or faculties. Most groups <strong>in</strong>dicated that if a faculty member was nom<strong>in</strong>ated for courseware development, his/her<br />

adm<strong>in</strong>istrative schedule should be reduced <strong>in</strong> order to provide more time to devote to this work. It was noted that<br />

<strong>the</strong> time allotted to <strong>the</strong> course-writ<strong>in</strong>g process was <strong>in</strong>adequate because <strong>of</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r compet<strong>in</strong>g responsibilities such<br />

as teach<strong>in</strong>g workload, adm<strong>in</strong>istrative duties, and o<strong>the</strong>r special assignments from <strong>the</strong> university. In <strong>the</strong> case <strong>of</strong> this<br />

round <strong>of</strong> development, <strong>the</strong>re were also unexpected delays due to <strong>in</strong>dustrial strike action at <strong>the</strong> university.<br />

Skills<br />

Most <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> developers already had basic word process<strong>in</strong>g, presentation and spread sheet skills. Work<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong><br />

teams was beneficial because members <strong>of</strong> each team brought <strong>the</strong>ir expertise <strong>in</strong>to <strong>the</strong> process. However, all group<br />

members had to develop Moodle skills. The tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g approach was that developers had to learn <strong>the</strong> functionality<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> technology tools and <strong>the</strong>n use <strong>the</strong>m immediately <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> design and development <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir own courses. This<br />

had its positive and negative sides: <strong>the</strong> positive aspect was that developers began to practise what <strong>the</strong>y had just<br />

learned; <strong>the</strong> negative aspect was that <strong>the</strong>y seemed unsure that <strong>the</strong>y had ga<strong>in</strong>ed sufficient competence to be able<br />

to use <strong>the</strong> various features. However, for subsequent course development tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g, some groups suggested that<br />

<strong>the</strong> two processes could be separated. The consensus was that each development team should have a technology<br />

expert attached to it.<br />

Pedagogy<br />

With <strong>the</strong> exception <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> developers from <strong>the</strong> Faculty <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong>, all <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> developers experienced challenges <strong>in</strong><br />

terms <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>structional design. Develop<strong>in</strong>g specific objectives that go beyond <strong>the</strong> level <strong>of</strong> recall and understand<strong>in</strong>g,<br />

recommend<strong>in</strong>g strategies that suit different content, and suggest<strong>in</strong>g assessment techniques were all new activities<br />

for many <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> participants. This limitation <strong>in</strong> pedagogical skills was reflected <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> nature <strong>of</strong> activities <strong>in</strong>itially<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

81


Design<strong>in</strong>g and Develop<strong>in</strong>g e-Content <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>:<br />

The University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan model<br />

provided for learners <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> courses.<br />

However, as expla<strong>in</strong>ed by one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> technology groups, <strong>the</strong> provision <strong>of</strong> a completed template for one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

courses, which was presented as a guide for o<strong>the</strong>rs, proved helpful. The ARCIS group suggested it would have<br />

been better to ensure that <strong>in</strong>structional design skills were acquired and that developers designed <strong>the</strong>ir courses,<br />

before proceed<strong>in</strong>g to tra<strong>in</strong> participants <strong>in</strong> technology tools design. It was suggested (by <strong>the</strong> General Studies and<br />

Science groups) that <strong>the</strong> university should <strong>in</strong>vest <strong>in</strong> provid<strong>in</strong>g pedagogical tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g for its staff. Where this was not<br />

possible, it was suggested, each development team should have at least one pedagogy expert attached to <strong>the</strong> team.<br />

Faculty support<br />

Developers experienced faculty support at different levels. The Technology group enjoyed <strong>the</strong> support <strong>of</strong> its dean,<br />

because he was <strong>the</strong> university coord<strong>in</strong>ator for <strong>the</strong> project. The Pharmacy group expla<strong>in</strong>ed that its members were<br />

able to attend <strong>the</strong> e-content development retreat because <strong>the</strong>y were given <strong>of</strong>ficial exemption from attend<strong>in</strong>g a faculty<br />

board meet<strong>in</strong>g dur<strong>in</strong>g that period. This suggests that if people <strong>in</strong> key positions are <strong>in</strong>formed and supportive, <strong>the</strong><br />

process is more likely to succeed.<br />

Motivation<br />

While all <strong>the</strong> groups stated that a level <strong>of</strong> extr<strong>in</strong>sic motivation, especially monetary, should be <strong>in</strong>tegrated <strong>in</strong>to<br />

courseware development, <strong>the</strong>y said that <strong>the</strong>y were not <strong>in</strong>itially motivated by money, because many <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>m did not<br />

even know <strong>the</strong>re was any reward attached to <strong>the</strong> process. However, <strong>the</strong>y said <strong>the</strong> monetary rewards encouraged <strong>the</strong>m<br />

to cont<strong>in</strong>ue. With respect to <strong>the</strong> reward received, <strong>the</strong> Science group expla<strong>in</strong>ed that it could never be commensurate<br />

with <strong>the</strong> time and effort expended on <strong>the</strong> project. Thus, ra<strong>the</strong>r than see<strong>in</strong>g this as a motivator, one member <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

Technology group felt that it acted as a source <strong>of</strong> distraction. In future, it was suggested that resources be released<br />

as and when due, to facilitate work progression.<br />

The major motivation for participation, accord<strong>in</strong>g to one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Technology and ARCIS groups, was <strong>in</strong>terest <strong>in</strong><br />

us<strong>in</strong>g technology. For <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong> and College <strong>of</strong> Medic<strong>in</strong>e groups, <strong>the</strong> excitement related to <strong>the</strong> possibilities<br />

technology presented <strong>in</strong> terms <strong>of</strong> support<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>ir large classes and <strong>the</strong> fact that, through technology, <strong>the</strong>y could<br />

cater for skills development <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir students – <strong>in</strong> terms <strong>of</strong> conduct<strong>in</strong>g experiments (for <strong>the</strong> College <strong>of</strong> Medic<strong>in</strong>e<br />

group) and teach<strong>in</strong>g skills (for <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong> group).<br />

The need for a conducive environment for development was greatly emphasized. This applies both to Internet<br />

access and regular power supply. O<strong>the</strong>r environmental factors <strong>in</strong>clude provid<strong>in</strong>g hardware such as laptops and<br />

modems to promote access to <strong>the</strong> onl<strong>in</strong>e course materials.<br />

The fact that participation <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> e-content development process did not currently count as part <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> criteria used<br />

for staff promotion purposes was identified as a major constra<strong>in</strong>t. For most <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> developers it took self-discipl<strong>in</strong>e<br />

to ensure that this did not underm<strong>in</strong>e <strong>the</strong> process <strong>of</strong> development. The university should be committed to a<br />

reward system that <strong>in</strong>tegrates time and effort <strong>in</strong> e-content development <strong>in</strong>to promotion criteria. An <strong>in</strong>stitutional<br />

sett<strong>in</strong>g where teach<strong>in</strong>g is greatly undervalued will never yield <strong>the</strong> best <strong>in</strong> terms <strong>of</strong> learn<strong>in</strong>g materials and this will<br />

subsequently be reflected <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> quality <strong>of</strong> graduates produced.<br />

Technical support<br />

The work experienced several constra<strong>in</strong>ts related to technical support. This <strong>in</strong>cluded slow and irregular connectivity,<br />

and limited support from <strong>the</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> Technical Unit, whose members were constra<strong>in</strong>ed by <strong>the</strong>ir exist<strong>in</strong>g university<br />

schedules, which <strong>the</strong>y had to comb<strong>in</strong>e with provid<strong>in</strong>g support for <strong>the</strong> e-content development process. The <strong>in</strong>itial<br />

82<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


Design<strong>in</strong>g and Develop<strong>in</strong>g e-Content <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>:<br />

The University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan model<br />

proposal <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> project, to appo<strong>in</strong>t a technical staff person per team <strong>of</strong> developers, was not achievable. Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore,<br />

most <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> technical support personnel were also experiment<strong>in</strong>g with <strong>the</strong> Moodle platform for <strong>the</strong> first time<br />

dur<strong>in</strong>g this process. However, accord<strong>in</strong>g to one group, gett<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> required technical support for Moodle was easy<br />

for <strong>the</strong>m, because <strong>the</strong>y scheduled time with <strong>the</strong> technical staff.<br />

Project communication<br />

Communicat<strong>in</strong>g goals <strong>in</strong> each phase <strong>of</strong> development and timel<strong>in</strong>e was below expectation. There were times when<br />

developers were not sure <strong>of</strong> what was happen<strong>in</strong>g and where exactly <strong>the</strong>y were on <strong>the</strong> project timetable. For many<br />

this proved quite frustrat<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

Study question 4: Provid<strong>in</strong>g explanations<br />

Explanations for <strong>the</strong> successes or failures experienced were based on <strong>the</strong> constructs identified <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> models used<br />

for this study.<br />

Attitude<br />

The construct ‘attitude’, as found <strong>in</strong> both <strong>the</strong> TAM and TPB, is an assessment <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> desirability <strong>of</strong> perform<strong>in</strong>g a<br />

behaviour by an <strong>in</strong>dividual. Fenton and Hall (1997) cited <strong>in</strong> Umarji and Seaman (2005: 4) discuss practitioner<br />

attitude <strong>in</strong> detail and claim, ‘if you fail to generate positive feel<strong>in</strong>gs towards a s<strong>of</strong>tware program, you seriously<br />

underm<strong>in</strong>e your likelihood <strong>of</strong> success’ (2005: 4). At <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>ception <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> project, most <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> developers had a very<br />

positive and enthusiastic attitude towards technology and high self-efficacy towards <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> computers. However,<br />

enthusiasm dw<strong>in</strong>dled slightly as <strong>the</strong> project cont<strong>in</strong>ued, as was observed <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> response to meet<strong>in</strong>gs. Many <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

developers felt constra<strong>in</strong>ed by hav<strong>in</strong>g several roles to fulfil at <strong>the</strong> same time, while <strong>the</strong> reward system failed to<br />

confer any advantage with<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> wider university system. Many wondered how <strong>the</strong>ir activities would contribute<br />

to <strong>the</strong>ir career progression. One <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> factors revealed <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> FGDs is that <strong>the</strong> content developers nom<strong>in</strong>ated<br />

from <strong>the</strong> various departments/faculties were faculty staff that already had a level <strong>of</strong> use <strong>of</strong> technology <strong>in</strong> teach<strong>in</strong>g<br />

and learn<strong>in</strong>g. Most likely this was <strong>the</strong> reason for <strong>the</strong> high levels <strong>of</strong> enthusiasm regard<strong>in</strong>g courseware development.<br />

Subjective norm<br />

‘Subjective norm’ is a construct <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> TPB, and expla<strong>in</strong>s that social pressure can <strong>in</strong>fluence an <strong>in</strong>dividual’s <strong>in</strong>tention<br />

to use a system. To a large extent, this had a positive effect on <strong>the</strong> developers. For example, as already mentioned,<br />

one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> groups received approval from <strong>the</strong> dean <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> faculty to be absent from a faculty board meet<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong><br />

order to attend <strong>the</strong> e-content development retreat. This approval went a long way towards positively <strong>in</strong>fluenc<strong>in</strong>g<br />

<strong>the</strong> attitude <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> group members <strong>in</strong> terms <strong>of</strong> work<strong>in</strong>g hard and be<strong>in</strong>g effective.<br />

Subjective norm also concerns <strong>the</strong> significant role that <strong>the</strong> attitudes <strong>of</strong> a group <strong>of</strong> co-developers play <strong>in</strong> e-content<br />

development and use. If one developer feels that <strong>the</strong> e-content project is not effective or worthwhile, s/he may<br />

negatively <strong>in</strong>fluence people and this attitude might beg<strong>in</strong> to spread through <strong>the</strong> group. This would potentially<br />

cause a reduction <strong>in</strong> general energy and <strong>in</strong>terest. Although some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> developers stated that peer (co-developers’)<br />

attitudes did not have an <strong>in</strong>fluence on <strong>the</strong>m, o<strong>the</strong>rs expla<strong>in</strong>ed that <strong>the</strong> presence <strong>of</strong> good team leaders enhanced<br />

<strong>the</strong>ir attitude towards <strong>the</strong> project. O<strong>the</strong>rs expla<strong>in</strong>ed that <strong>the</strong>y put <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir best effort because <strong>the</strong>y did not want to<br />

disappo<strong>in</strong>t <strong>the</strong>ir departmental head who had selected <strong>the</strong>m.<br />

Perceived behavioural control<br />

The ‘perceived behavioural control’ construct is from <strong>the</strong> TPB. Ajzen (2002) expla<strong>in</strong>s that it addresses a situation<br />

where performance may depend on non-motivational factors such as availability <strong>of</strong> requisite opportunities and<br />

resources. At different stages, <strong>the</strong> developers were motivated or discouraged, depend<strong>in</strong>g on <strong>the</strong> presence or absence<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

83


Design<strong>in</strong>g and Develop<strong>in</strong>g e-Content <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>:<br />

The University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan model<br />

<strong>of</strong> external factors, such as <strong>in</strong>adequate Internet facilities that affected <strong>the</strong> output at times and <strong>the</strong> rate <strong>of</strong> delivery.<br />

One <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> developers expla<strong>in</strong>ed that although <strong>the</strong>y were advised to use a designated location <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> university<br />

where <strong>the</strong>re was constant Internet access, he found it difficult to move all his resources from his <strong>of</strong>fice to <strong>the</strong><br />

location. The issue <strong>of</strong> erratic power supply was mentioned by virtually every developer. Most <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>m had a high<br />

level <strong>of</strong> self-efficacy, which ensured that <strong>in</strong>ternal factors (personal ease or difficulty <strong>of</strong> perform<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> behaviour)<br />

were not an issue. Some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> developers said that <strong>the</strong>y were confident <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir use <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Moodle platform after<br />

some experience, and were able to navigate easily around <strong>the</strong> platform.<br />

Perceived usefulness<br />

The ‘perceived usefulness’ construct from <strong>the</strong> TAM <strong>in</strong> this study is <strong>the</strong> developers’ perception <strong>of</strong> how <strong>the</strong>ir<br />

<strong>in</strong>volvement with e-content will directly benefit <strong>the</strong>mselves and <strong>the</strong> university. Many <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> groups identified<br />

technology as a tool to help <strong>the</strong>m teach better, enhance delivery, make <strong>the</strong> teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g experience<br />

more excit<strong>in</strong>g, and make it easier to share knowledge. Know<strong>in</strong>g that <strong>the</strong> materials would be reusable was part <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> usefulness developers referred to when talk<strong>in</strong>g about <strong>the</strong> technology. On more personal grounds, one faculty<br />

member expla<strong>in</strong>ed: ‘If by any chance, I am not around, my course would still go on.’ Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore, <strong>the</strong> developers<br />

were will<strong>in</strong>g to work on <strong>the</strong> Moodle platform because <strong>the</strong>y saw <strong>the</strong> potential it has for assessment, which had<br />

been a challenge for most <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> teachers. The perceived usefulness <strong>of</strong> e-learn<strong>in</strong>g by developers could be one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

major reasons account<strong>in</strong>g for <strong>the</strong> project successes.<br />

Motivation<br />

The results <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> current study show that motivation (<strong>in</strong>tr<strong>in</strong>sic and extr<strong>in</strong>sic) largely <strong>in</strong>fluenced <strong>the</strong> developers’<br />

attitude towards <strong>the</strong> development <strong>of</strong> e-content. Dur<strong>in</strong>g this study, motivation for <strong>the</strong> developers was mostly<br />

extr<strong>in</strong>sic. The extr<strong>in</strong>sic motivation came from factors such as <strong>the</strong> group leaders and <strong>the</strong> fact that <strong>the</strong>re was a<br />

monetary reward. Some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> teams said <strong>the</strong> strength <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir group leaders played a significant role <strong>in</strong> motivat<strong>in</strong>g<br />

<strong>the</strong>m to work, while o<strong>the</strong>rs compla<strong>in</strong>ed about <strong>the</strong> attitude <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir team leaders towards <strong>the</strong> work be<strong>in</strong>g done,<br />

which was discourag<strong>in</strong>g. The developers also emphasised that <strong>the</strong> availability <strong>of</strong> team leaders to answer questions<br />

was encourag<strong>in</strong>g. One developer, a graduate assistant, commented that provid<strong>in</strong>g lecturers and research assistants<br />

with <strong>the</strong> same monetary reward seemed fair, and served as a motivation to work hard. While some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> faculty<br />

members remarked that extr<strong>in</strong>sic motivation was a positive force, o<strong>the</strong>rs noted that for <strong>the</strong>m it was <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>tr<strong>in</strong>sic<br />

motivation that mattered most. They expla<strong>in</strong>ed that <strong>the</strong> desire for self-improvement was <strong>the</strong> positive force, and<br />

<strong>the</strong> desire to help students and <strong>the</strong> desire to move <strong>the</strong> university forward were key considerations.<br />

Relative advantage<br />

Developers commented that, when compared with <strong>the</strong> long-stand<strong>in</strong>g forms <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>struction, <strong>the</strong> new pedagogical<br />

and technological knowledge spurred <strong>the</strong>m <strong>in</strong>to active engagement <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> development process. O<strong>the</strong>rs remarked<br />

that reusability <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> material after development served to encourage developers.<br />

Image<br />

Some faculty members mentioned that be<strong>in</strong>g part <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> project boosted <strong>the</strong>ir image <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> eyes <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir colleagues,<br />

both with<strong>in</strong> and outside <strong>the</strong> university. They fur<strong>the</strong>r expla<strong>in</strong>ed that <strong>the</strong>ir association with such an <strong>in</strong>novative project<br />

and be<strong>in</strong>g part <strong>of</strong> a pioneer<strong>in</strong>g group were motivation enough for <strong>the</strong>m to participate. For most <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> developers,<br />

it was <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>terest and not <strong>the</strong> image that was <strong>the</strong> major driv<strong>in</strong>g factor.<br />

Results demonstrability<br />

The ability <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Moodle platform to produce immediate feedback on <strong>the</strong> work <strong>in</strong> progress encouraged people<br />

to work harder. One <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> developers noted that<br />

84<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


Design<strong>in</strong>g and Develop<strong>in</strong>g e-Content <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>:<br />

The University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan model<br />

it was quite encourag<strong>in</strong>g see<strong>in</strong>g your handiwork and <strong>the</strong> progress made at every po<strong>in</strong>t. It felt like build<strong>in</strong>g a house<br />

and putt<strong>in</strong>g one block after <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r and f<strong>in</strong>ally <strong>the</strong> joy <strong>of</strong> see<strong>in</strong>g a complete build<strong>in</strong>g even though it may still<br />

need a bit <strong>of</strong> furnish<strong>in</strong>g here and <strong>the</strong>re.<br />

For ano<strong>the</strong>r <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> developers, opportunities to give a presentation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> work done and receiv<strong>in</strong>g favourable<br />

acceptance by external quality auditors went a long way <strong>in</strong> encourag<strong>in</strong>g her dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> entire process. Yet ano<strong>the</strong>r<br />

developer said that see<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> courses developed by o<strong>the</strong>r people and what <strong>the</strong>y had done, and how far <strong>the</strong>y had<br />

gone, spurred her on to work on her course.<br />

Study question 5: Suggestions for improvement from lessons learned<br />

Course selection<br />

Based on <strong>the</strong> developers’ experiences with deploy<strong>in</strong>g some modules <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir courseware, it was agreed by most <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> FGD groups that it would be better to start with higher-level courses and <strong>the</strong>n work downwards towards lower<br />

levels. This would ensure that students com<strong>in</strong>g from lower level would not be disappo<strong>in</strong>ted if, after becom<strong>in</strong>g<br />

familiar with e-learn<strong>in</strong>g at lower levels, such facilities were not yet available at a higher level. Also <strong>the</strong>re is lower<br />

risk <strong>of</strong> non-compliance at higher levels; mature students at a higher level will more easily adapt to ‘forced’ changes<br />

and challenges dur<strong>in</strong>g delivery.<br />

Development team<br />

Experiences dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> <strong>PHEA</strong> ETI project <strong>in</strong>dicated that <strong>the</strong> team leader should act as a leader and motivator.<br />

Also, <strong>the</strong> team members should consistently teach <strong>the</strong> courses dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>ir tenure <strong>of</strong> work<strong>in</strong>g on <strong>the</strong> project.<br />

Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore, it was seen as important to have a blend <strong>of</strong> pedagogy experts and technical staff <strong>in</strong> each team.<br />

It is suggested that, for maximum effectiveness, <strong>the</strong> IT policy <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> university, which will mandate <strong>the</strong> development<br />

<strong>of</strong> courses, should also ensure a system where <strong>the</strong> selection <strong>of</strong> courses and development teams goes through <strong>the</strong><br />

university l<strong>in</strong>e <strong>of</strong> authority. This would ensure that deans work with <strong>the</strong>ir heads <strong>of</strong> department, and <strong>the</strong> latter<br />

with <strong>the</strong> lecturers, to ensure completion <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> development <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> courses identified <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> scheduled timel<strong>in</strong>e.<br />

In recommend<strong>in</strong>g a development team, it would be wise to ascerta<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> will<strong>in</strong>gness to participate on <strong>the</strong> part <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> proposed members, ra<strong>the</strong>r than participation be<strong>in</strong>g forced on <strong>in</strong>dividuals.<br />

Courseware needs considerable time to evolve and mature. There should thus be a form <strong>of</strong> time release <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

<strong>in</strong>stitution or reduction <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> adm<strong>in</strong>istrative load <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> developers with<strong>in</strong> that period.<br />

Faculty model<br />

An <strong>in</strong>cremental model <strong>of</strong> courseware development has been suggested. This is a case where one or two modules<br />

are developed and pilot tested, and <strong>the</strong> pedagogy, usability and content are quality assured, before go<strong>in</strong>g on to<br />

<strong>the</strong> next module. Such a review process, which would <strong>in</strong>volve experts, faculty members, faculty quality assurance<br />

members, and students, would assist <strong>in</strong> ensur<strong>in</strong>g that mistakes can be corrected right from <strong>the</strong> outset ra<strong>the</strong>r than<br />

wait<strong>in</strong>g until <strong>the</strong> end to do so. It is suggested that, s<strong>in</strong>ce many students are technology savvy and are <strong>the</strong> end<br />

users, it would help <strong>the</strong> developers to seek <strong>the</strong>ir op<strong>in</strong>ions on usability and ease <strong>of</strong> use, as well as harness<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>ir<br />

development skills. It is also proposed that <strong>the</strong> model <strong>in</strong>tegrate a couple <strong>of</strong> development retreats, which would<br />

take place outside <strong>the</strong> university, as well as awareness workshops at various management levels <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> university.<br />

The peculiarities <strong>of</strong> each department/course should be taken <strong>in</strong>to account when determ<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> technology tools<br />

to be used. One <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Science groups felt that <strong>the</strong>re was some content that could not be fitted effectively <strong>in</strong>to<br />

Moodle. However, this may reveal more about <strong>the</strong> pedagogical knowledge <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> developers than anyth<strong>in</strong>g else.<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

85


Design<strong>in</strong>g and Develop<strong>in</strong>g e-Content <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>:<br />

The University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan model<br />

It underscores <strong>the</strong> po<strong>in</strong>t though that pedagogical tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g for academic staff is necessary. Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore, contentspecific<br />

technology tools should be provided and capacity-build<strong>in</strong>g programmes conducted based on this.<br />

Motivation<br />

The follow<strong>in</strong>g forms <strong>of</strong> motivation were recommended:<br />

• Courseware development should be allocated po<strong>in</strong>ts as part <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> research component <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> university staff<br />

promotion criteria, hav<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> status <strong>of</strong> textbook development or higher. This is because <strong>the</strong> time and effort<br />

committed to e-content development could just as well have been used for o<strong>the</strong>r research work. However,<br />

it would be necessary to develop guidel<strong>in</strong>es for assess<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> relative value and ensur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> quality <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

courseware developed;<br />

• The provision <strong>of</strong> facilities such as m<strong>in</strong>i computers, faster connectivity and modems should be considered;<br />

• Appo<strong>in</strong>t<strong>in</strong>g more quality assurance assessors would allow for prompt assessment and responses to issues<br />

germane to <strong>the</strong> development;<br />

• Monetary motivation should be provided when promised;<br />

• Participation <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> development could be <strong>of</strong>ficially recognized via a letter from <strong>the</strong> vice-chancellor and/or<br />

via <strong>the</strong> university bullet<strong>in</strong>;<br />

• Creat<strong>in</strong>g and fund<strong>in</strong>g a unit to support and tra<strong>in</strong> lecturers <strong>in</strong> technologies for courseware and e-content would<br />

make sense, as would provid<strong>in</strong>g pedagogical support for academics; and<br />

• Sponsor<strong>in</strong>g developers to participate <strong>in</strong> e-learn<strong>in</strong>g conferences and workshops should be considered.<br />

CONCLUSION AND MODEL<br />

Based on <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>formation ga<strong>the</strong>red and analysed, a model (see <strong>the</strong> Appendix) is proposed for <strong>the</strong> development <strong>of</strong><br />

e-content <strong>in</strong> higher education <strong>in</strong>stitutions <strong>in</strong> Africa. The model comprises three phases: plann<strong>in</strong>g; tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g and<br />

development; and pilot and deployment.<br />

Plann<strong>in</strong>g: This first phase addresses <strong>the</strong> issues <strong>of</strong> policy and o<strong>the</strong>r groundwork that should be <strong>in</strong> place to ensure<br />

<strong>the</strong> effectiveness <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> process. In develop<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> policy, three ma<strong>in</strong> issues should be addressed.<br />

• Facilities and <strong>in</strong>frastructure: Gett<strong>in</strong>g fast and reliable Internet facilities work<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> all locations <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> university<br />

is a must. Computer laboratories and ma<strong>in</strong>tenance structures should be put <strong>in</strong> place to support <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

courseware. Technical staff should be able to handle all challenges that would arise from <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> platform.<br />

• Institutional support: This focuses on reward system, pedagogical tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g, and time release. The policy must<br />

stipulate what types <strong>of</strong> reward system would be put <strong>in</strong> place for <strong>the</strong> efforts <strong>of</strong> developers, with <strong>in</strong>put <strong>in</strong> this<br />

regard be<strong>in</strong>g elicited from <strong>the</strong> faculty staff. Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore, modalities for mandatory pedagogical tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong><br />

staff should be given great consideration. The policy should address what form <strong>of</strong> time release would be given<br />

to members <strong>of</strong> staff who had been nom<strong>in</strong>ated by <strong>the</strong> faculty to develop <strong>the</strong>ir courseware.<br />

• Involvement <strong>of</strong> all stakeholders: It is recommended that each faculty management <strong>in</strong> conjunction with lecturers<br />

and students should decide what courses would be developed, when, and who <strong>the</strong> content development team<br />

members would be. This would ensure that <strong>the</strong> faculties and students take ownership <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> outcomes and<br />

thus give <strong>the</strong>ir full support, especially to <strong>the</strong> deployment at <strong>the</strong> appropriate time.<br />

Tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g and development: The second phase relates to sensitization (awareness), and tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g and development.<br />

The wider university audience should be made aware <strong>of</strong> what possibilities exist for us<strong>in</strong>g technology to support<br />

teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g, and what is proposed <strong>in</strong> each faculty. This would give <strong>the</strong> wider stakeholders <strong>the</strong> opportunity<br />

to express <strong>the</strong>ir concerns and have <strong>the</strong>m addressed at an early stage. It would also provide opportunities for <strong>in</strong>puts<br />

to be made <strong>in</strong>to <strong>the</strong> process, for <strong>in</strong>creased effectiveness. Along with this would be tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g on course template<br />

design and <strong>the</strong> technology tools to be used. The course template is a framework for <strong>the</strong> design <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>struction,<br />

86<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


Design<strong>in</strong>g and Develop<strong>in</strong>g e-Content <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>:<br />

The University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan model<br />

enabl<strong>in</strong>g developers to smoothly translate <strong>the</strong>ir ideas through technology to <strong>the</strong> learn<strong>in</strong>g platform. The tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g<br />

on technology tools would also enable developers to have a degree <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>dependence <strong>in</strong> design<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>ir courses,<br />

without need<strong>in</strong>g to depend on <strong>the</strong> technical experts.<br />

The design <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> courseware should adopt an <strong>in</strong>cremental model. This <strong>in</strong>volves develop<strong>in</strong>g small portions <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

content, showcas<strong>in</strong>g it, and do<strong>in</strong>g a m<strong>in</strong>i trial, test<strong>in</strong>g and evaluation, before mov<strong>in</strong>g on to <strong>the</strong> next chunk <strong>of</strong><br />

content. The evaluation would address both technology and pedagogy, evaluat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> content and <strong>the</strong> usability, and<br />

would be carried out by technology and pedagogy experts, faculty course reviewers, and students. The evaluation<br />

reports would feed back <strong>in</strong>to <strong>the</strong> development phase, until a level <strong>of</strong> acceptability was atta<strong>in</strong>ed. This <strong>in</strong>cremental<br />

nature is captured <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> model as S 1<br />

- S n<br />

– that is, <strong>the</strong> first cycle is represented by S 1<br />

, <strong>the</strong> next S, and so on, until<br />

<strong>the</strong> end <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> process (as S n<br />

).<br />

The third phase, pilot and deployment, <strong>in</strong>volves evaluation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> courseware on a larger scale. This should be with<br />

<strong>the</strong> full <strong>in</strong>volvement <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> faculty staff and students. After remediation, based on <strong>the</strong> pilot test<strong>in</strong>g, full deployment<br />

should commence. All <strong>the</strong>se must be carried out with a significant number <strong>of</strong> awareness programmes, to enable<br />

faculty staff and students to be aware <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> development process and its results.<br />

It is expected that <strong>the</strong> pilot<strong>in</strong>g and use <strong>of</strong> this model (see <strong>the</strong> Appendix), both at UI and by o<strong>the</strong>r higher education<br />

<strong>in</strong>stitutions, would not only provide guidance for develop<strong>in</strong>g e-content, but also contribute important feedback<br />

and <strong>in</strong>put for improv<strong>in</strong>g this process.<br />

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS<br />

The authors would like to acknowledge <strong>the</strong> support that was given by <strong>the</strong> South African Institute for Distance<br />

<strong>Education</strong> (Saide) project team <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> development <strong>of</strong> this case study.<br />

REFERENCES<br />

Ajzen, I. (2002). Construct<strong>in</strong>g a TPB questionnaire: Conceptual and methodological considerations. Retrieved 23<br />

November 2012 from http://people.umass.edu/aizen/pdf/tpb.measurement.pdf<br />

Ajzen, I. (2006). Perceived behavioral control, self-efficacy, locus <strong>of</strong> control, and <strong>the</strong> <strong>the</strong>ory <strong>of</strong> planned behavior.<br />

Journal <strong>of</strong> Applied Social Psychology, 32, 665–683.<br />

Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1992). Extr<strong>in</strong>sic and <strong>in</strong>tr<strong>in</strong>sic motivation to use computers <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

workplace. Journal <strong>of</strong> Applied Social Psychology, 22(14), 1111–1132.<br />

Moore, G. C. & Benbasat, I. (1991). Development <strong>of</strong> an <strong>in</strong>strument to measure <strong>the</strong> perceptions <strong>of</strong> adopt<strong>in</strong>g an<br />

<strong>in</strong>formation technology <strong>in</strong>novation. Information Systems Research, 2(3), 192–222.<br />

Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>novations. The Free Press, New York.<br />

Taylor, S. & Todd, P.A. (1995). Assess<strong>in</strong>g IT usage: The role <strong>of</strong> prior experience. MIS Quarterly, 19(2), 561–570.<br />

Teclehaimanot, B. & Lamb, A. (2005). Technology-rich faculty development for teacher educators: The evolution <strong>of</strong><br />

a program. Contemporary Issues <strong>in</strong> Technology and Teacher <strong>Education</strong> [Onl<strong>in</strong>e serial], 5(3/4). Retrieved 15 December<br />

2013 from www.citejournal.org/vol5/iss3/currentpractice/article2.cfm<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

87


Design<strong>in</strong>g and Develop<strong>in</strong>g e-Content <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>:<br />

The University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan model<br />

Umarji, M. & Seaman, C. (2005). Predict<strong>in</strong>g acceptance <strong>of</strong> s<strong>of</strong>tware process improvement. Human and Social<br />

Factors <strong>of</strong> S<strong>of</strong>tware Eng<strong>in</strong>eer<strong>in</strong>g (HSSE). St Louis, MO. Retrieved 15 December 2013 from http://userpages.umbc.<br />

edu/~cseaman/papers/HSSE05.pdf. ISBN # 1-59593-120-1/05/05<br />

Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>formation technology:<br />

Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478.<br />

Venkatesh, V. & Speier, C. (1999). Computer technology tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> workplace: A longitud<strong>in</strong>al <strong>in</strong>vestigation<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> effect <strong>of</strong> mood. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 79(1), 1–28.<br />

Yilmazel-Sah<strong>in</strong>, Y. & Oxford, R. L. (2010). A comparative analysis <strong>of</strong> teacher education faculty development<br />

models for technology <strong>in</strong>tegration. Journal <strong>of</strong> Technology and Teacher <strong>Education</strong>, 18(4), 693–720.<br />

88<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


Design<strong>in</strong>g and Develop<strong>in</strong>g e-Content <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>:<br />

The University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan model<br />

APPENDIX: THE THREE-PHASE MODEL FOR E-CONTENT DEVELOPMENT<br />

PHASE 1: PLANNING PHASE 2: TRAINING AND<br />

DEVELOPMENT<br />

IT POLICY<br />

AWARENESS<br />

COURSE<br />

DESIGN<br />

TEMPLATE<br />

TRAINING<br />

TECHNOLOGY<br />

TOOLS<br />

TRAINING<br />

Facilities &<br />

<strong>in</strong>frastructure<br />

Institutional<br />

support<br />

Faculty<br />

<strong>in</strong>volvement &<br />

responsibilities<br />

<strong>of</strong> deans,<br />

HoDs &<br />

lecturers<br />

Instructional<br />

systems design<br />

Reward<br />

systems<br />

Time<br />

release<br />

Development<br />

stage: Incremental<br />

model (S 1<br />

- S n<br />

)<br />

Periodic showand-tell<br />

sessions<br />

Pedagogy<br />

tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g<br />

Choice <strong>of</strong><br />

courses and<br />

content<br />

Evaluation<br />

Identify<br />

motivators<br />

• Prioritize courses<br />

• Source pedagogy<br />

expert<br />

• Source technology<br />

expert<br />

• Student <strong>in</strong>volvement<br />

Content<br />

review<br />

Usability<br />

Quality assurance: Pedagogy & technology<br />

PHASE 3: PILOT AND<br />

DEPLOYMENT<br />

FULL PILOT<br />

TESTING<br />

Faculty-based<br />

and with<br />

students<br />

F<strong>in</strong>al revision<br />

respond<strong>in</strong>g to<br />

test<strong>in</strong>g results<br />

and feedback<br />

Full deployment<br />

and ma<strong>in</strong>tenance<br />

<strong>of</strong> e-courses<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

89


Students’ Acceptance <strong>of</strong> Mobile Phones for Distance Learn<strong>in</strong>g Tutorials:<br />

A case study <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan<br />

Students’ Acceptance <strong>of</strong> Mobile Phones<br />

for Distance Learn<strong>in</strong>g Tutorials: A case<br />

study <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan<br />

Gloria Adedoja<br />

Department <strong>of</strong> Teacher <strong>Education</strong><br />

Faculty <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong><br />

University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan, Nigeria<br />

sadedoja@yahoo.com<br />

Omobola Adelore<br />

Department <strong>of</strong> Adult <strong>Education</strong><br />

Faculty <strong>of</strong> <strong>Education</strong><br />

University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan, Nigeria<br />

omobola.adelore@yahoo.com<br />

Francis Egbokhare<br />

Department <strong>of</strong> L<strong>in</strong>guistics<br />

Faculty <strong>of</strong> Arts<br />

University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan, Nigeria<br />

foegbokhare@yahoo.com<br />

Ayodeji Oluleye<br />

Department <strong>of</strong> Industrial Eng<strong>in</strong>eer<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Faculty <strong>of</strong> Technology<br />

University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan, Nigeria<br />

aoluleye@yahoo.com<br />

ABSTRACT<br />

This case study focuses on students’ acceptance <strong>of</strong> mobile phones for learn<strong>in</strong>g purposes with<strong>in</strong> a project that seeks<br />

to go beyond merely communicat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>formation and creat<strong>in</strong>g access to learn<strong>in</strong>g resources, and aims to support<br />

and engage distance education students by us<strong>in</strong>g mobile phones for distance education tutorials. The research<br />

design is based on Davis’ Technology Acceptance Model <strong>of</strong> 1986 and tests multiple hypo<strong>the</strong>ses concern<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong><br />

effects <strong>of</strong> perceived usefulness, perceived ease <strong>of</strong> use, <strong>in</strong>terest <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> technology, and technology self-efficacy on<br />

<strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> mobile tutorials. The evidence ga<strong>the</strong>red confirms that <strong>the</strong> mobile tutorials enhanced teach<strong>in</strong>g and<br />

learn<strong>in</strong>g. However, <strong>the</strong> evidence also highlights several preconditions for successful implementation, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g<br />

provid<strong>in</strong>g technical support to students, hav<strong>in</strong>g a well-designed <strong>in</strong>terface, improv<strong>in</strong>g student <strong>in</strong>formation and<br />

communication technology literacies, controll<strong>in</strong>g messag<strong>in</strong>g and data costs faced by students, and improv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong><br />

capacity <strong>of</strong> course developers and technical staff.<br />

Keywords: mobile learn<strong>in</strong>g (m-learn<strong>in</strong>g), learn<strong>in</strong>g design, Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), University<br />

<strong>of</strong> Ibadan case study, distance education, Partnership for <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong> <strong>in</strong> Africa (<strong>PHEA</strong>) <strong>Education</strong>al<br />

Technology Initiative (ETI)<br />

INTRODUCTION<br />

Over <strong>the</strong> past 12 years, <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan (UI) has striven to improve <strong>the</strong> teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g experience<br />

<strong>of</strong> staff and students. In order to support this process, <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>itial focus was on build<strong>in</strong>g a campus <strong>in</strong>formation and<br />

communication technology (<strong>ICT</strong>) <strong>in</strong>frastructure. The focus has now shifted to us<strong>in</strong>g this <strong>in</strong>frastructure to support<br />

<strong>the</strong> teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g process, underscor<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> importance <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>teraction between staff and students <strong>in</strong><br />

achiev<strong>in</strong>g an effective teach<strong>in</strong>g and learn<strong>in</strong>g environment.<br />

90<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


Students’ Acceptance <strong>of</strong> Mobile Phones for Distance Learn<strong>in</strong>g Tutorials:<br />

A case study <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan<br />

A number <strong>of</strong> educational technology <strong>in</strong>itiatives are be<strong>in</strong>g pursued. Among o<strong>the</strong>rs, key reasons for <strong>in</strong>vest<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong><br />

educational technology at <strong>the</strong> UI are to achieve <strong>the</strong> follow<strong>in</strong>g:<br />

• Implement discipl<strong>in</strong>e-specific pedagogical strategies that require students’ active engagement and help to<br />

develop problem-solv<strong>in</strong>g and problem-pos<strong>in</strong>g skills;<br />

• Create a learn<strong>in</strong>g environment that challenges students to become actively engaged, <strong>in</strong>dependent lifelong<br />

learners, <strong>in</strong> and outside <strong>of</strong> formal learn<strong>in</strong>g spaces;<br />

• Enrich learn<strong>in</strong>g experiences through enhanced, <strong>in</strong>teractive learn<strong>in</strong>g;<br />

• Offer flexible and cost-effective quality learn<strong>in</strong>g to time-constra<strong>in</strong>ed and economically deprived students;<br />

• Alleviate staff and space capacity constra<strong>in</strong>ts with<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitution;<br />

• Achieve learner-centred education, and enable open and distance learn<strong>in</strong>g; and<br />

• Develop teachers who can be supported to make learn<strong>in</strong>g relevant, excit<strong>in</strong>g and effective, while achiev<strong>in</strong>g<br />

efficiencies beneficial to <strong>the</strong>ir multi-faceted academic responsibilities.<br />

The Distance Learn<strong>in</strong>g Centre (DLC) <strong>of</strong> UI is a very strong arm <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> university, and was established <strong>in</strong> 2002<br />

to cater for <strong>the</strong> needs <strong>of</strong> distance education students (both adult and young, whe<strong>the</strong>r employed or job seekers).<br />

This responded to one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> major objectives <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Nigerian national policy on education: <strong>the</strong> provision <strong>of</strong> equal<br />

educational opportunities to all citizens at different levels <strong>of</strong> education, thus widen<strong>in</strong>g participation.<br />

The National Universities Commission (NUC) policy guidel<strong>in</strong>es (NUC, 2009) for open and distance learn<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong><br />

Nigerian universities encourage <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> technology <strong>in</strong> deploy<strong>in</strong>g distance education programmes. In this regard,<br />

content delivery should be based on resource-based pedagogies, and <strong>the</strong> management <strong>of</strong> assessment processes should<br />

be automated. In l<strong>in</strong>e with <strong>the</strong> NUC policy guidel<strong>in</strong>es, and funded by <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiative (ETI)<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Partnership for <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong> <strong>in</strong> Africa (<strong>PHEA</strong>), <strong>the</strong> project conceived <strong>in</strong> this case study explored <strong>the</strong><br />

use <strong>of</strong> mobile phones <strong>in</strong> support<strong>in</strong>g distance education students. This case study focuses on <strong>the</strong> acceptance <strong>of</strong><br />

mobile phones for tutorial delivery <strong>in</strong> distance education.<br />

PROJECT RATIONALE<br />

The <strong>in</strong>tegration <strong>of</strong> mobile phones to support distance education has three clear rationales. Firstly, distance education<br />

students are <strong>in</strong> diverse geographical locations, which means <strong>the</strong>y are learn<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> isolation. Affordable technology<br />

is desirable and appropriate to susta<strong>in</strong> communication with <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitution and o<strong>the</strong>r students. The mobile phone<br />

can be used to provide academic and adm<strong>in</strong>istrative support for such students and <strong>the</strong>refore reduce what Moore <strong>in</strong><br />

Keegan (1997: 22–38) refers to as ‘transactional distance’ – one <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> major constra<strong>in</strong>ts faced by distance education<br />

students. Secondly, students can conveniently carry <strong>the</strong> device with <strong>the</strong>m, mean<strong>in</strong>g that <strong>the</strong>y can learn ‘on <strong>the</strong><br />

go’. Thirdly, mobile phone penetration <strong>in</strong> Africa is high, and mobile devices such as phones and personal digital<br />

assistants (PDAs) attract much lower prices than desktop computers and <strong>the</strong>refore <strong>of</strong>fer a less expensive method<br />

<strong>of</strong> communicat<strong>in</strong>g. In Nigeria, <strong>the</strong> evidence <strong>of</strong> mobile penetration and adoption is pervasive and irrefutable:<br />

mobile phones, PDAs, MP3 players, portable gam<strong>in</strong>g devices and laptops all abound. From toddlers to seniors,<br />

people are <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>gly communicat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> ways that would have been impossible to imag<strong>in</strong>e only a few years ago.<br />

Simultaneously, many claims about <strong>the</strong> potential and benefits <strong>of</strong> mobile learn<strong>in</strong>g (m-learn<strong>in</strong>g) to make learn<strong>in</strong>g<br />

possible anywhere, anytime, <strong>in</strong> any way and for any reason have been reported (Adedoja & Oyekola, 2008; Adedoja,<br />

Omotunde & Adelore, 2010; Young, 2002; and Salmon, 2000).<br />

Improv<strong>in</strong>g our understand<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> this support for education us<strong>in</strong>g mobile phones is <strong>the</strong>refore crucial. There is a<br />

grow<strong>in</strong>g body <strong>of</strong> evidence (Green, 2002; Campbell, 2004, 2006; and Hooper, Fitzpatrick & Weal, 2009) that<br />

current hardware <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> form <strong>of</strong> PDAs and mobile phones can <strong>in</strong>deed help to <strong>in</strong>crease communication and<br />

<strong>in</strong>teraction and enhance <strong>the</strong> quality <strong>of</strong> learn<strong>in</strong>g, particularly <strong>in</strong> distance education. Hooper et al. (2009) argue<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

91


Students’ Acceptance <strong>of</strong> Mobile Phones for Distance Learn<strong>in</strong>g Tutorials:<br />

A case study <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan<br />

that mobile technologies are <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>gly be<strong>in</strong>g used to create <strong>in</strong>novative m-learn<strong>in</strong>g experiences for students, and<br />

a key benefit has been students’ collaboration with <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> PDAs and mobile phones.<br />

In pursuit <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> stated reasons for <strong>in</strong>vest<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> educational technology at <strong>the</strong> UI, four groups have been work<strong>in</strong>g<br />

on capacity build<strong>in</strong>g, development <strong>of</strong> open courseware resources, use <strong>of</strong> radio and mobile phone resources, and <strong>the</strong><br />

development <strong>of</strong> tele-classrooms, respectively. In particular, <strong>the</strong> mobile phone project entails explor<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong><br />

mobile phones for distance education tutorials. The project seeks to go beyond merely communicat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>formation<br />

and creat<strong>in</strong>g access to learn<strong>in</strong>g resources, and aims to support and engage distance education students. This case<br />

study focuses on students’ acceptance <strong>of</strong> mobile phones for learn<strong>in</strong>g purposes.<br />

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY<br />

The objectives <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> study on <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> mobile phones are to:<br />

• Determ<strong>in</strong>e <strong>the</strong> level <strong>of</strong> acceptance, among students, <strong>of</strong> mobile delivery modes;<br />

• Create opportunities for users to contribute to <strong>the</strong> f<strong>in</strong>al product, under <strong>the</strong> follow<strong>in</strong>g variables: external factors,<br />

perceived usefulness, perceived ease <strong>of</strong> use, <strong>in</strong>tention to use, attitude to us<strong>in</strong>g, and action (Davis, 1986);<br />

• Determ<strong>in</strong>e which cultural and environmental factors are predom<strong>in</strong>ant <strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>fluenc<strong>in</strong>g acceptability <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

courseware;<br />

• Determ<strong>in</strong>e preference for a particular delivery format and reasons for choice;<br />

• Ascerta<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> type <strong>of</strong> support students need for effective use <strong>of</strong> mobile delivery modes; and<br />

• Based on challenges faced dur<strong>in</strong>g use, make appropriate recommendations for adoption.<br />

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK<br />

The study’s framework is based on Davis’ (1986) Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), which made use <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

Theory <strong>of</strong> Reasoned Action (TRA). TRA postulates that an <strong>in</strong>dividual’s attitude towards behaviour is <strong>in</strong>fluenced<br />

by his/her beliefs. Notably, <strong>the</strong> model deals with <strong>the</strong> acceptability <strong>of</strong> an <strong>in</strong>formation system/tool, predict<strong>in</strong>g<br />

acceptability <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> system/tool and modifications to be made, if necessary, for acceptability. The model assumes<br />

that acceptability is for <strong>the</strong> most part determ<strong>in</strong>ed by two factors: perceived usefulness and perceived ease <strong>of</strong> use.<br />

Perceived usefulness can be described as <strong>the</strong> degree to which an <strong>in</strong>dividual believes that <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> a system/tool<br />

will improve his/her performance, while perceived ease <strong>of</strong> use refers to <strong>the</strong> degree to which an <strong>in</strong>dividual believes<br />

<strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> a tool/system will be effortless or require m<strong>in</strong>imum effort. The model postulates that use <strong>of</strong> a system/<br />

tool is determ<strong>in</strong>ed by ‘behavioural <strong>in</strong>tention’, an <strong>in</strong>dividual’s ‘attitude towards us<strong>in</strong>g’, and perception <strong>of</strong> its utility.<br />

Davis (1986) posits that <strong>the</strong> attitude <strong>of</strong> an <strong>in</strong>dividual is not <strong>the</strong> only factor that determ<strong>in</strong>es his/her use <strong>of</strong> new<br />

technology, as <strong>the</strong> impact <strong>the</strong> tool or system is expected to have on <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>dividual’s performance is also significant.<br />

The key factors <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> TAM are illustrated <strong>in</strong> Figure 1.<br />

Figure 1: The TAM relationship between perceived usefulness, perceived ease <strong>of</strong> use, and actual use (Davis, 1986)<br />

Perceived<br />

Usefulness (U)<br />

External<br />

Variables<br />

Attitude towards<br />

Us<strong>in</strong>g (A)<br />

Behavioural<br />

Intention to Use (BI)<br />

Actual System<br />

Use<br />

Perceived Ease<br />

<strong>of</strong> Use (E)<br />

92<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities


Students’ Acceptance <strong>of</strong> Mobile Phones for Distance Learn<strong>in</strong>g Tutorials:<br />

A case study <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan<br />

Many studies have been carried out us<strong>in</strong>g Davis’ (1986) TAM. Most conclude that <strong>the</strong> model is <strong>in</strong>complete because<br />

it fails to account for social <strong>in</strong>fluence <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> acceptance, adoption and use <strong>of</strong> a new tool/system (Misiolek, Zakaria<br />

& Zhang, 2002; Malhotra & Galletta, 1999). It is important to take this <strong>in</strong>to account because human be<strong>in</strong>gs are<br />

largely <strong>in</strong>fluenced by <strong>the</strong>ir social environments. None<strong>the</strong>less, many studies have used <strong>the</strong> constructs <strong>of</strong> perceived<br />

usefulness, perceived ease <strong>of</strong> use, and subjective norms to expla<strong>in</strong> technology acceptance and use for a variety <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>in</strong>structional systems, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g onl<strong>in</strong>e learn<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

Mun and Yujong (2003) exposed students to Micros<strong>of</strong>t end-user applications for a period <strong>of</strong> eight weeks. After a<br />

two-week trial period, it was found that students’ self-efficacy, enjoyment and learn<strong>in</strong>g goal-orientation determ<strong>in</strong>ed<br />

<strong>the</strong> actual use and acceptance <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> system. Shen, Laffey, L<strong>in</strong> and Luang (2006) explored <strong>the</strong> extent to which<br />

subjective norms (<strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>fluence <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>structors, mentors and peers) <strong>in</strong>fluence and shape <strong>the</strong> perception <strong>of</strong> students<br />

towards <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> course delivery modes. Results showed that <strong>in</strong>structors’ <strong>in</strong>fluence makes a significant contribution<br />

to perceived usefulness on <strong>the</strong> part <strong>of</strong> students, while mentors’ <strong>in</strong>fluence is significant to perceived ease <strong>of</strong> use. This<br />

suggests <strong>the</strong> importance <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>structors’ and mentors’ roles <strong>in</strong> shap<strong>in</strong>g students’ impressions <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> value <strong>of</strong> us<strong>in</strong>g<br />

course delivery systems. Miller, Ra<strong>in</strong>er and Corley (2003) found that perceived ease <strong>of</strong> use and perceived usefulness<br />

had a significant positive relationship with <strong>the</strong> amount <strong>of</strong> time students spent on a course, and <strong>the</strong>y note that<br />

both are significant factors for predict<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>tention to use. Sumak et al. (2011) show that <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> Moodle by<br />

students depends on ‘behavioural <strong>in</strong>tentions’ and ‘attitude’; and perceived usefulness is found to be <strong>the</strong> strongest<br />

and most important predictor <strong>of</strong> attitude.<br />

The current study used Davis’ (1986) TAM as a framework for analys<strong>in</strong>g how distance education students at UI<br />

perceive <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> mobile technology for learn<strong>in</strong>g purposes. Figure 2 shows <strong>the</strong> adapted model used <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> study.<br />

Figure 2: Proposed TAM (adapted from Davis, 1986)<br />

Perceived<br />

usefulness<br />

Perceived ease <strong>of</strong><br />

use<br />

Interest<br />

Attitude<br />

towards use<br />

Behavioural<br />

<strong>in</strong>tention to<br />

use<br />

Actual use<br />

Acceptance<br />

<strong>of</strong> model<br />

Technology<br />

self-efficacy<br />

PROPOSED MODEL<br />

In <strong>the</strong> proposed model (Figure 2) based on <strong>the</strong> TAM, it is assumed that perceived usefulness, perceived ease <strong>of</strong> use,<br />

<strong>in</strong>terest, and technology self-efficacy will exert an important direct effect on attitude towards use and behavioural<br />

<strong>in</strong>tention to use. Accord<strong>in</strong>g to Farah (2011), technology self-efficacy refers to teachers’ belief <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir ability to<br />

achieve successful <strong>in</strong>tegration <strong>of</strong> technology <strong>in</strong>to <strong>the</strong>ir classrooms. All <strong>the</strong> aforementioned variables will exert an<br />

important direct effect on attitude towards use and behavioural <strong>in</strong>tention to use, which <strong>in</strong> comb<strong>in</strong>ation with actual<br />

use are <strong>the</strong> most important antecedents <strong>of</strong> acceptance <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> proposed model. Look<strong>in</strong>g at e-learn<strong>in</strong>g use as similar<br />

<strong>Unlock<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Potential</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>ICT</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Higher</strong> <strong>Education</strong>: Case Studies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Education</strong>al Technology Initiatives at African Universities<br />

93


Students’ Acceptance <strong>of</strong> Mobile Phones for Distance Learn<strong>in</strong>g Tutorials:<br />

A case study <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> University <strong>of</strong> Ibadan<br />

to students’ lecture delivery modes, <strong>the</strong> model predicts students’ acceptance <strong>of</strong> us<strong>in</strong>g e-learn<strong>in</strong>g systems. In <strong>the</strong><br />

light <strong>of</strong> this, additional factors derived from literature (e.g. <strong>in</strong>terest, technology, and self-efficacy) and constructs<br />

from <strong>the</strong> TAM are expla<strong>in</strong>ed <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> study.<br />

Hypo<strong>the</strong>ses<br />

In this study, <strong>the</strong> follow<strong>in</strong>g hypo<strong>the</strong>ses were tested:<br />

H 1<br />

: Perceived usefulness is positively related to improv<strong>in</strong>g attitude towards use <strong>of</strong> mobile technology;<br />

H 2<br />

: Perceived ease <strong>of</strong> use has a positive effect on attitude towards use <strong>of</strong> mobile technology;<br />

H 3<br />

: Perceived ease <strong>of</strong> use has a positive effect on perceived usefulness <strong>of</strong> mobile technology.<br />

H 4<br />

: Interest is positively related to <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> mobile technology;<br />

H 5<br />

: Technology self-efficacy is positively related to attitude, hence affect<strong>in</strong>g students’ acceptance <strong>of</strong> mobile<br />

technology use;<br />

H 6<br />

: Perceived usefulness will be associated with actual use <strong>of</strong> mobile technology;<br />

H 7<br />

: Behavioural <strong>in</strong>tention to use is positively associated with students’ acceptance <strong>of</strong> mobile technology use; and<br />

H 8<br />

: There is a significant relationship between attitudes <strong>of</strong> students and <strong>the</strong>ir behavioural <stro